On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 11:57:06AM +0100, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > On Samstag, 28. März 2009 10:48:16 Graham Percival wrote: > > I'm confused. To update git (assuming I'm in the top-level > > directory), do I need: > > git fetch > > git rebase origin/master > > or > > git pull > > ? > > Both work. There is one difference, though, if you have a local commit: > > - -) git fetch + git rebase will take that local commit and append it after > the HEAD of current master, so it will be > yourcommit (=new local master) > | > current_remote_head > | > state when you last pulled/fetched > > - -) git pull will merge your local commit and the current remote master: > (local master; merged) > | \ > current_remote_head your_commit > | / > state when you last pulled/fetched > > > So, in the end the files will look similar in both cases (they will contain > both the local and the remote changes), but the history will be different...
The first version looks easier to read. Is there any command-line argument we could give to "git commit" to make it automatically rebase stuff? Or any option we could give to "git pull", or an option to set in git/config ? Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
