git/git-pull.sh, branch v1.6.6.3

Merge branch 'maint'

2009-12-09T06:47:09Z

* maint: add-interactive: fix deletion of non-empty files pull: clarify advice for the unconfigured error case

Revert recent "git merge HEAD ..." deprecation

2009-12-08T23:26:39Z

This reverts commit c0ecb07048ce2123589a2f077d296e8cf29a9570 "git-pull.sh: Fix call to git-merge for new command format" and commit b81e00a965c62ca72a4b9db425ee173de147808d "git-merge: a deprecation notice of the ancient command line syntax". They caused a "git pull" (without any arguments, and without any local commits---only to update to the other side) to warn that commit log message is ignored because the merge resulted in a fast-forward. Another possible solution is to add an extra option to "git merge" so that "git pull" can tell it that the message given is not coming from the end user (the canned message is passed just in case the merge resulted in a non-ff and caused commit), but I think it is easier _not_ to deprecate the old syntax. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

pull: clarify advice for the unconfigured error case

2009-12-03T18:04:27Z

When pull --rebase fails because it cannot find what branch to merge against, the error message implies we are trying to merge. Say "rebase against" instead of "merge with" to avoid confusion. The configuration suggested to remedy the situation uses a confusing syntax, with variables specified in the dotted form accepted by 'git config' but separated from their values by the '=' delimiter used by config files. Since the user will have to edit this output anyway, it is more helpful to provide a config file snippet to paste into an editor and modify. Signed-off-by: Jan Krüger Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

git-pull.sh: Fix call to git-merge for new command format

2009-12-02T18:42:48Z

Now "git merge HEAD" is officially deprecated, we should clean our own use as well. Signed-off-by: Horst H. von Brand Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

Merge branch 'fc/doc-fast-forward'

2009-11-16T00:41:02Z

* fc/doc-fast-forward: Use 'fast-forward' all over the place Conflicts: builtin-merge.c

Teach 'git merge' and 'git pull' the option --ff-only

2009-10-30T23:02:26Z

For convenience in scripts and aliases, add the option --ff-only to only allow fast-forwards (and up-to-date, despite the name). Disallow combining --ff-only and --no-ff, since they flatly contradict each other. Allow all other options to be combined with --ff-only (i.e. do not add any code to handle them specially), including the following options: * --strategy (one or more): As long as the chosen merge strategy results in up-to-date or fast-forward, the command will succeed. * --squash: I cannot imagine why anyone would want to squash commits only if fast-forward is possible, but I also see no reason why it should not be allowed. * --message: The message will always be ignored, but I see no need to explicitly disallow providing a redundant message. Acknowledgements: I did look at Yuval Kogman's earlier patch (107768 in gmane), mainly as shortcut to find my way in the code, but I did not copy anything directly. Signed-off-by: Björn Gustavsson Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

Use 'fast-forward' all over the place

2009-10-25T06:50:28Z

It's a compound word. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

pull: improve advice for unconfigured error case

2009-10-09T18:22:43Z

There are several reasons a git-pull invocation might not have anything marked for merge: 1. We're not on a branch, so there is no branch configuration. 2. We're on a branch, but there is no configuration for this branch. 3. We fetched from the configured remote, but the configured branch to merge didn't get fetched (either it doesn't exist, or wasn't part of the fetch refspec). 4. We fetched from the non-default remote, but didn't specify a branch to merge. We can't use the configured one because it applies to the default remote. 5. We fetched from a specified remote, and a refspec was given, but it ended up not fetching anything (this is actually hard to do; if the refspec points to a remote branch and it doesn't exist, then fetch will fail and we never make it to this code path. But if you provide a wildcard refspec like refs/bogus/*:refs/remotes/origin/* then you can see this failure). We have handled (1) and (2) for some time. Recently, commit a6dbf88 added code to handle case (3). This patch handles cases (4) and (5), which previously just fell under other cases, producing a confusing message. While we're at it, let's rewrap the text for case (3), which looks terribly ugly as it is. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

git-pull: dead code removal

2009-10-05T19:03:25Z

Back when a74b170 (git-pull: disallow implicit merging to detached HEAD, 2007-01-15) added this check, $? referred to the error status of reading HEAD as a symbolic-ref; but cd67e4d (Teach 'git pull' about --rebase, 2007-11-28) moved the command away from where the check is, and nobody noticed the breakage. Ever since, $? has always been 0 (tr at the end of the pipe to find merge_head never fails) and other case arms were never reached. These days, error_on_no_merge_candidates function is prepared to handle a detached HEAD case, which was what the code this patch removes used to handle. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

pull: Clarify "helpful" message for another corner case

2009-09-23T05:26:27Z

When the remote branch we asked for merging did not exist in the set of fetched refs, we unconditionally hinted that it was because of lack of configuration. It is not necessarily so, and risks sending users for a wild goose chase. Make sure to check if that is indeed the case before telling a wild guess to the user. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano