Subject: Re: git pull for update of netdev fails.

From: Jakub Narebski <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:58:48 +0200

Petr Baudis wrote:

> Dear diary, on Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 05:28:08PM CEST, I got a letter
> where Linus Torvalds <[email-masked]> said that...

>> However, you can tell git that Jeff is being difficult by marking such 
>> branches individually as being rebased.
> 
> This is really a wrong way of describing the problem - I'd say that Git
> is being difficult here. The point is, the subsystem maintainers need to
> maintain stacks of patches and rebase against the main kernel branch
> regularily, and they want to still publish their current state. So it's
> not really any of them being strange or difficult, but Git being so
> because it has no seamless support for tracking those branches.

There was idea around moving remotes configuration to config file to have
some per branch configureation, including readonly for protecting tracking
branches, marking default branch for merge with (and which tracking
branch(es) to merge)...

...and that included marking branch _on the server side_ as being rebased,
i.e. without preserved history. Unfortunately, the discussion petered out
without changes to git. Branch marked as pu-like would either get '+'
in appropriate Pull line in remotes file generated during clone, or they
wouldn't need '+'.

By the way, there is '--force' option to git-pull/git-fetch...
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git