-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26.8k
Add -u
short option for git pull
#2037
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Add the short form `-u` as an alias for `--set-upstream` in `git pull`, similarly to `git push` which supports both forms. This allows users to use `git pull -u <remote> <branch>` as a shorter alternative to `git pull --set-upstream <remote> <branch>`. One test is included to verify that the short form works correctly and set the upstream configuration as expected. Signed-off-by: Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz>
Welcome to GitGitGadgetHi @jjerphan, and welcome to GitGitGadget, the GitHub App to send patch series to the Git mailing list from GitHub Pull Requests. Please make sure that either:
You can CC potential reviewers by adding a footer to the PR description with the following syntax:
NOTE: DO NOT copy/paste your CC list from a previous GGG PR's description, Also, it is a good idea to review the commit messages one last time, as the Git project expects them in a quite specific form:
It is in general a good idea to await the automated test ("Checks") in this Pull Request before contributing the patches, e.g. to avoid trivial issues such as unportable code. Contributing the patchesBefore you can contribute the patches, your GitHub username needs to be added to the list of permitted users. Any already-permitted user can do that, by adding a comment to your PR of the form Both the person who commented An alternative is the channel
Once on the list of permitted usernames, you can contribute the patches to the Git mailing list by adding a PR comment If you want to see what email(s) would be sent for a After you submit, GitGitGadget will respond with another comment that contains the link to the cover letter mail in the Git mailing list archive. Please make sure to monitor the discussion in that thread and to address comments and suggestions (while the comments and suggestions will be mirrored into the PR by GitGitGadget, you will still want to reply via mail). If you do not want to subscribe to the Git mailing list just to be able to respond to a mail, you can download the mbox from the Git mailing list archive (click the curl -g --user "<EMailAddress>:<Password>" \
--url "imaps://imap.gmail.com/INBOX" -T /path/to/raw.txt To iterate on your change, i.e. send a revised patch or patch series, you will first want to (force-)push to the same branch. You probably also want to modify your Pull Request description (or title). It is a good idea to summarize the revision by adding something like this to the cover letter (read: by editing the first comment on the PR, i.e. the PR description):
To send a new iteration, just add another PR comment with the contents: Need help?New contributors who want advice are encouraged to join git-mentoring@googlegroups.com, where volunteers who regularly contribute to Git are willing to answer newbie questions, give advice, or otherwise provide mentoring to interested contributors. You must join in order to post or view messages, but anyone can join. You may also be able to find help in real time in the developer IRC channel, |
/allow |
User jjerphan is now allowed to use GitGitGadget. |
/preview |
Preview email sent as pull.2037.git.git.1756147422766.gitgitgadget@gmail.com |
/submit |
Submitted as pull.2037.git.git.1756147789443.gitgitgadget@gmail.com To fetch this version into
To fetch this version to local tag
|
On the Git mailing list, "D. Ben Knoble" wrote (reply to this): On Mon, Aug 25, 2025 at 2:50 PM Julien Jerphanion via GitGitGadget
<gitgitgadget@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz>
>
> Add the short form `-u` as an alias for `--set-upstream`
> in `git pull`, similarly to `git push` which supports both forms.
>
> This allows users to use `git pull -u <remote> <branch>` as a
> shorter alternative to `git pull --set-upstream <remote> <branch>`.
>
> One test is included to verify that the short form works
> correctly and set the upstream configuration as expected.
>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz>
> ---
> Add -u short option for git pull
>
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-2037%2Fjjerphan%2Fpull%2Fset-upstream-short-option-v1
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-2037/jjerphan/pull/set-upstream-short-option-v1
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/2037
>
> builtin/pull.c | 2 +-
> t/t5553-set-upstream.sh | 7 +++++++
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/pull.c b/builtin/pull.c
> index 5ebd5296207..e09f2963f78 100644
> --- a/builtin/pull.c
> +++ b/builtin/pull.c
> @@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ static struct option pull_options[] = {
> 0),
> OPT_BOOL(0, "show-forced-updates", &opt_show_forced_updates,
> N_("check for forced-updates on all updated branches")),
> - OPT_PASSTHRU(0, "set-upstream", &set_upstream, NULL,
> + OPT_PASSTHRU('u', "set-upstream", &set_upstream, NULL,
Don't forget to update the docs ;)
> N_("set upstream for git pull/fetch"),
> PARSE_OPT_NOARG),
>
> diff --git a/t/t5553-set-upstream.sh b/t/t5553-set-upstream.sh
> index 70e3376d31b..b4dd7c62ce9 100755
> --- a/t/t5553-set-upstream.sh
> +++ b/t/t5553-set-upstream.sh
> @@ -124,6 +124,13 @@ test_expect_success 'pull --set-upstream upstream main sets branch main but not
> check_config_missing other
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'pull -u upstream main sets branch main but not other' '
> + clear_config main other &&
> + git pull --no-rebase -u upstream main &&
> + check_config main upstream refs/heads/main &&
> + check_config_missing other
> +'
> +
> test_expect_success 'pull --set-upstream main:other2 does not set the branch other2' '
> clear_config other2 &&
> git pull --no-rebase --set-upstream upstream main:other2 &&
>
> base-commit: 1fa68948c3d76328236cac73d2adf33c905bd8e3
> --
> gitgitgadget
>
--
D. Ben Knoble |
User |
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this): "Julien Jerphanion via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
writes:
> From: Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz>
>
> Add the short form `-u` as an alias for `--set-upstream`
> in `git pull`, similarly to `git push` which supports both forms.
>
> This allows users to use `git pull -u <remote> <branch>` as a
> shorter alternative to `git pull --set-upstream <remote> <branch>`.
The above explains what it does. It does not justify why it is
needed. Surely it may allow them to type less, but is it something
they would do very often, like every other day or even twice an
hour? If not, should 'set-upstream' squat on a short-and-sweet 'u',
robbing it from future developers to use it for more useful purpose?
|
On the Git mailing list, Julien Jerphanion wrote (reply to this): -------- Original Message --------
On 8/26/25 16:51, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> "Julien Jerphanion via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> > From: Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz>
> >
> > Add the short form `-u` as an alias for `--set-upstream`
> > in `git pull`, similarly to `git push` which supports both forms.
> >
> > This allows users to use `git pull -u <remote> <branch>` as a
> > shorter alternative to `git pull --set-upstream <remote> <branch>`.
>
> The above explains what it does. It does not justify why it is
> needed. Surely it may allow them to type less, but is it something
> they would do very often, like every other day or even twice an
> hour? If not, should 'set-upstream' squat on a short-and-sweet 'u',
> robbing it from future developers to use it for more useful purpose?
>
>
Hello,
Before all, thank you for maintaining git!
Having this shortcut would be really useful for some use cases where one needs to pull locally branches from forks before updating them and pushing them again on the fork instead than on the upstream project (typical use case for conda-forge's feedstocks).
Julien. |
On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this): Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz> writes:
[jc: line-wrapped an overly long single line]
> Having this shortcut would be really useful for some use cases
> where one needs to pull locally branches from forks before
> updating them and pushing them again on the fork instead than on
> the upstream project (typical use case for conda-forge's
> feedstocks).
Sorry, do you mean that you stay on a single branch, and then you
would pull from one place with "git pull -u" followed by "git push"
to push back there, and repeat that for other places, practically
redefining the meaning of the "upstream" to "the last remote
repository I pulled from and I am supposed to push to that remote
and nowhere else in my workflow"?
|
On the Git mailing list, Julien Jerphanion wrote (reply to this): -------- Original Message --------
On 9/18/25 02:32, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Julien Jerphanion <git@jjerphan.xyz> writes:
>
> [jc: line-wrapped an overly long single line]
>
> > Having this shortcut would be really useful for some use cases
> > where one needs to pull locally branches from forks before
> > updating them and pushing them again on the fork instead than on
> > the upstream project (typical use case for conda-forge's
> > feedstocks).
>
> Sorry, do you mean that you stay on a single branch, and then you
> would pull from one place with "git pull -u" followed by "git push"
> to push back there, and repeat that for other places, practically
> redefining the meaning of the "upstream" to "the last remote
> repository I pulled from and I am supposed to push to that remote
> and nowhere else in my workflow"?
>
>
More or less, I was referring to the official repository in
such workflows as `upstream`.
I would also sporadically fetch and pull from `upstream`,
but I would not set local branches to tracks remote
branches there.
As a user, I find that having `-u` usable for the `pull`
command would be consistent and expected given that
it is present for other commands already.
Thank you for spending time considering this addition. |
cc: "D. Ben Knoble" ben.knoble@gmail.com