From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>,
Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
Son Luong Ngoc <sluongng@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] pull: handle conflicting rebase/merge options via last option wins
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 12:58:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqpmvjs61c.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BExWMSFr7CQskjKVhr5fiWCnxoaN_RaJ2Yir+36aiyBjQ@mail.gmail.com> (Elijah Newren's message of "Thu, 15 Jul 2021 12:04:38 -0700")
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> Let me ask two questions:
>
> 1. When is it beneficial for users to set both pull.ff and pull.rebase?
> 2. Is it harmful to users for us to allow both to be set when we will
> just ignore one?
>
> I believe the answer to (1) is "never", and the answer to (2) is "yes".
I agree (1) never gives you anything, even though it does not hurt,
and (2) is "meh".
> For the second question in particular, I can think of two example cases:
>
> 2a) Users start with pull.ff=only, perhaps suggested by someone else
> and left in their config for a long time. When users hit a case that
> can't fast-forward and they either ask for help or find a post on
> stack overflow that suggests setting pull.rebase=true, they do so and
> then get no warning that the setting they just added is being ignored.
Well, overriding "only fast-forward is allowed" with "instead of
merge, you can rebase" is a nonsense suggestion in the first place,
no? Why does Git suddenly become responsible for such a misguided
suggestion?
> 2b) Perhaps users start with pull.rebase=true (suggested by a
> colleague and forgot about it as they are more of a tester than a
> developer and thus usually only see fast-forwards). Then at some
> point they need to function as an integrator, and they read the docs
> and determine that pull.ff=false should do what they want to create
> merge commits.
Again, "I want to pee in the snow" is not what you need to act as an
integrator. I do not see how relevant this example is, either. You
are just reacting to a wrong suggestion.
> But then they get shocked that they've rebased public
> commits (and perhaps also pushed them out) when they wanted merges.
> Our docs have pretty clearly stated that pull.ff=false and --no-ff
> create merges.
That is something we need to and can fix. The "pee in the snow
commit can be created by passing --no-ff" was written back when the
designed audiences of "pull" were primarily those who merge (think
of "pull --rebase" as afterthought). IOW, to the minds of those who
originally wrote --no-ff feature (and its doc), "pull --rebase" was
not in the picture.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-15 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-15 2:40 [PATCH 0/5] Handle conflicting pull options Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 2:40 ` [PATCH 1/5] pull: move definitions of parse_config_rebase and parse_opt_rebase Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 2:40 ` [PATCH 2/5] pull: convert OPT_PASSTHRU for fast-forward options to OPT_CALLBACK Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 2:40 ` [PATCH 3/5] pull: handle conflicting rebase/merge options via last option wins Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 4:59 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-07-15 17:13 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-15 9:44 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-15 17:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-15 17:46 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-15 19:04 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-15 19:58 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2021-07-15 20:40 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-15 21:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-16 18:39 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-16 21:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-16 21:56 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-15 20:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-15 20:38 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-15 2:40 ` [PATCH 4/5] pull: abort if --ff-only is given and fast-forwarding is impossible Alex Henrie via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 2:40 ` [PATCH 5/5] pull: abort by default when fast-forwarding is not possible Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget
2021-07-15 5:18 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-07-15 16:56 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-15 9:48 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-16 9:32 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-07-16 18:13 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-15 9:37 ` [PATCH 0/5] Handle conflicting pull options Felipe Contreras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqpmvjs61c.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=sluongng@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).