Re: a more helpful message on "git status" output

Junio C Hamano writes: > Julián Landerreche writes: > >> OK, I'm mostly convinced. >> A more verbose, educational output could read: >> >> (use "git pull" to fetch newer commits from upstream and update your >> local branch) >> (use "git merge" to update your local branch) > > I actually do

Re: a more helpful message on "git status" output

Julián Landerreche writes: >> By running "git pull", the user may obtain yet newer commits from >> the upstream, which very likely will happen in an active project, or >> "git fetch" launched by "git pull" will return without doing >> anything after noticing there is nothing new. >> >> As long as

Re: a more helpful message on "git status" output

Julián Landerreche wrote: > A more verbose, educational output could read: > > (use "git pull" to fetch newer commits from upstream and update your local > branch) > (use "git merge" to update your local branch) Yes, I like this idea, with a few qualifications: 1. The first line is long.

Re: a more helpful message on "git status" output

> By running "git pull", the user may obtain yet newer commits from > the upstream, which very likely will happen in an active project, or > "git fetch" launched by "git pull" will return without doing > anything after noticing there is nothing new. > > As long as the updates to the upstream is als

Re: a more helpful message on "git status" output

Julián Landerreche writes: > when running "git status", if the current branch can be > fast-forwarded, the user get this message: > > On branch master > Your branch is behind 'origin/master' by 6 commits, and can be > fast-forwarded. > (use "git pull" to update your local branch) > > The