Re: [PATCH] man: git pull -r is a short for --rebase

["Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@xxxxxxx>]

From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 5:22 PM
> Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/git-pull.txt |    1 +
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-pull.txt b/Documentation/git-pull.txt
> > index defb544..67fa5ee 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/git-pull.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/git-pull.txt
> > @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ include::merge-options.txt[]
> >
> >  :git-pull: 1
> >
> > +-r::
> >  --rebase::
> >  Rebase the current branch on top of the upstream branch after
> >  fetching.  If there is a remote-tracking branch corresponding to
>
> I am not sure if this is worth it, as it comes from a natural
> "abbreviated options" support, i.e.

I wasn't aware of the  "abbreviated options" capability. Is meant to be 
in the man pages as I couldn't find it, or is it described differently?

Just adding the '-r' part of the option did seem sensible to me as a 
relative newbie.

> -r|--r|--re|--reb|--reba|--rebas|--rebase)
> rebase=true
>
> And I do not think we particularly want to do
>
>    +-r::
>    +--r::
>    +--re::
>    +--reb::
>    +--reba::
>    +--rebas::
>     --rebase::
>            Rebase the current...
>
> for obvious reasons.
> --

The extra one liner (-r|--r|--re|--reb|--reba|--rebas)  would be 
readable though not pretty, but the seven line version would be 
horrible!

Philip 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html