On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:09:34AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > It's not if you understand the difference between merge-then-commit and
> > commit-then-merge. But for a clueless user who has been told "replace
> > svn commit" with "git commit && git push" and replace "svn update" with
> > "git pull", it is quite similar.
> Well, yeah, but if they are so clueless they have to be told what to
> do, they can be told to do 'git pull --merge' instead, no?
I think it's fine to tell them to do "git pull --merge". What I'd worry
more about is somebody who is suddenly presented with the choice between
"--rebase" and "--merge" and doesn't know which to choose. We've created a
cognitive load on the user, and even more load if they choose --rebase
and don't quite understand what it means.
The current warning message in jc/pull-training-wheel is quite neutral
between the two options. Perhaps we should lean more towards merging?
I guess that works against John's case, though, which is clueless people
working on a project that _does_ care about the shape of history. At
least they would have to stop and think for a moment, though, which
might help (and maybe convince them to ask more clueful project
members). I don't know.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html