brian m. carlson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 05:25:59PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > Marc Branchaud wrote:
> > > On 14-04-30 04:14 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > > > What is wrong when `git pull` merges a fast-forward?
> > > 
> > > Nothing.  Everything.  It depends.
> > 
> > It depends on what? I don't see how a fast-forward `git pull` could
> > possibly have any trouble.
> > 
> > > > The problems with `git pull` come when you can't do a fast-forward 
> > > > merge, right?
> > > 
> > > Some of them, maybe most of them.
> > 
> > Name one problem with a fast-forward merge.
> At work, we have a workflow where we merge topic branches as
> non-fast-forward, so that we have a record of the history (including who
> reviewed the code), but when we want to just update our local branches,
> we always want fast-forward:
>   git checkout maintenance-branch
>   # Update our maintenance branch to the latest from the main repo.
>   git pull --ff-only
>   git pull --no-ff developer-remote topic-branch
>   git push main-repo HEAD
> So there are times when fast-forward merges are the right thing, and
> times when they're not, and as you can see, this depends on context and
> isn't per-repository.

That's not what I asked.

I didn't ask you if fast-forward merges were the right thing to do in
every situation.

I asked you, *when* people do a fast-forward merge (that is; when it's
possible and desirable), what are the problems that a fast-forward merge

I tired of waiting, so I'll answer for you: there are absolutely no
problems. The problems are only on non-fast-forward merges, and we have
a solution.

Felipe Contreras
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to