Subject: Re: Summary of the problems with git pull

From: Damien Robert <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 20:03:15 +0000 (UTC)

Felipe Contreras  wrote in message
<[email-masked]>:
> == 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.

Thanks for the nice summary.

As a user, I am very much in favor of adding a `git update` command. In
fact I already have a ruby script that does such a thing (fast-forward all my
local branches that have an upstream configured), so it would be nice to
have it directly in git core.