Thread (13 messages) 13 messages, 6 authors, 2016-08-11

Re: [PATCH] Explicitly add the default "git pull" behaviour to .git/config on clone

From: Peter Baumann <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 20:15:47

On 2006-12-06, Andy Parkins [off-list ref] wrote:
Without any specification in the .git/config file, git-pull will execute
"git-pull origin"; which in turn defaults to pull from the first "pull"
definition for the remote, "origin".

This is a difficult set of defaults to track for a new user, and it's
difficult to see what tells git to do this (especially when it is
actually hard-coded behaviour).  To ameliorate this slightly, this patch
explicitly specifies the default behaviour during a clone using the
"branch" section of the config.

For example, a clone of a typical repository would create a .git/config
containing:
  [remote "origin"]
  url = proto://host/repo.git
  fetch = refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/origin/master
  [branch "master"]
  remote = origin
  merge = refs/heads/master

The [branch "master"] section is such that there is no change to the
functionality of git-pull, but that functionality is now explicitly
documented.

Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <redacted>
---
This is really to help newbies.  By explicitly documenting the default
behaviour, it makes it clearer what is going on.  It also means no routing
through documentation to find out what config option needs changing.
I second that. It took me a while to understand why the first entry in
remotes/origin merged with the current branch. I thought it was a bug
because sometimes it did the right thing and once in a while nothing
went wrong.

Obviously, it have switched the branch. I even tried to made this
"buggy" behaviour reproducable to write a bugreport, but after several
days the light goes on and I just felt a little bit stupid :-)
It's possible that we would want to remove the default behaviour entirely
if there is no "branch" definition in the config.  That would prevent
accidents by users who don't know what pull does fully yet.
I'm not absolutly sure about this, but with --use-separate-remote this makes
sense, because you can easly teach someone new to git that the changes
from the remote branches are under refs/remotes/<branches> and (s)he
could merge it with git-pull . refs/remotes/$branch

No more clueless users why git pull on master branch updated the working
tree and git pull an other branch does nothing.

-Peter
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
 git-clone.sh |    4 +++-
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/git-clone.sh b/git-clone.sh
index 826fdda..992cb7c 100755
--- a/git-clone.sh
+++ b/git-clone.sh
@@ -413,7 +413,9 @@ then
 			rm -f "refs/remotes/$origin/HEAD"
 			git-symbolic-ref "refs/remotes/$origin/HEAD" \
 				"refs/remotes/$origin/$head_points_at"
-		esac
+		esac &&
+		git-repo-config branch."$head_points_at".remote "$origin" &&
+		git-repo-config branch."$head_points_at".merge "refs/heads/$head_points_at"
 	esac
 
 	case "$no_checkout" in
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help