Felipe Contreras wrote:
== git update ==
Another proposed solution is to have a new command: `git update`. This
command would be similar to `git pull --ff-only` by default, but it
could be configured to do merges instead, and when doing so in reverse.
And here it is:
Philippe Vaucher wrote:
Sorry if I missed a thread where it was already decided not to include
it.
Felipe, please don't use this to start any non-constructive behavior
(rant on who is right/wrong, my patches are not accepted, etc).
I never sent those patches. I gave up on the Git project.
Felipe Contreras wrote:
== git update ==
Another proposed solution is to have a new command: `git update`. This
command would be similar to `git pull --ff-only` by default, but it
could be configured to do merges instead, and when doing so in reverse.
And here it is:
Ping Yin
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:29 AM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
== git update ==
Another proposed solution is to have a new command: `git update`. This
command would be similar to `git pull --ff-only` by default, but it
could be configured to do merges
Felipe Contreras wrote in message
5366db742d494_18f9e4b308aa@nysa.notmuch:
== git update ==
Another proposed solution is to have a new command: `git update`. This
command would be similar to `git pull --ff-only` by default, but it
could be configured to do merges instead, and when doing so
5 matches
Mail list logo