Hi,
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
This patch is to show my current thinking. Please let me know
what you think.
I like it. As Linus stated, the index originally had a different role from
what it has now, so it really should be an internal git thing, i.e. the
git user should
Johannes Schindelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I like it. As Linus stated, the index originally had a different role from
what it has now, so it really should be an internal git thing, i.e. the
git user should not expect the index not to change when pulling.
Actually the issue and the way
I am tempted to move this logic to git fetch instead, because
it has the same issue. Tony's linus branch example has been
updated to do a git fetch instead of git pull from the
earlier description in his howto, but if he happens to be on the
linus branch, he would still have this same problem.
I
Luck, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the meantime, warning the user about the issue and suggesting
how to do the fast-forwarding of the working tree himself in the
warning message might be the safest and the most sensible thing
to do.
Yes please ... a big fat warning with coloured flashing
Earlier, I said:
Subject: Re: cache status after git pull
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:26:07 -0700
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1) Updated my linus branch:
$ git checkout linus git pull linus
The second command, git pull linus, would internally run git
fetch
5 matches
Mail list logo
