Thread (11 messages) flat view 11 messages, 8 authors, 2016-08-11

Re: git bug? + question

From: Martin Waitz <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 19:25:47

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

hoi :)

On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 12:51:32AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
    With separate remotes, I'd need something like:

            for b in master maint next pu
            do
                    git checkout $b && git pull && make || break
            done

    And I also would need to have per-branch configuration to merge
    from ". remotes/origin/$b" without re-fetching while on a
    non-master branch $b, for the above to work.  I still need to
    remember to process "master" first, so all things considered,
    this is a regression in usability for my workflow.
you could also run git-fetch first and then always default to
the local repository.  But that would of course make pull just
a shortcut for merge, without any fetch.

Would it be so bad for you to call fetch three times?
I think the most intuitive thing for pull would be to fetch into
remotes/<remotename>/* and then to merge
remotes/<remotename>/<currentbranch>.

-- 
Martin Waitz

Attachments

Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help