Re: [auto merged failed]

[Tassilo Horn]

>> No, fetch is not bad at all.  It's just "load all changes from the
>> remote without applying them on my local branches".  And pull is
>> basically fetch + merge.
>
> Aha, so this is just the other way around as in mercurial.
>
>  hg pull -u 
>
> pulls but does not merge

I think "hg pull" is pretty much like "git fetch".  I'm not exactly sure
how "hg pull -u" compares to "git pull", though.  In case you have no
local commits which are not on the remote, it will update your local
branch to the latest commit on the remote.

The interesting question is what happens when you've made a commit
locally and Alice pushed another commit to the remote.

With "git pull" it would create a merge commit merging Uwe-commit and
Alice-commit.  With "git pull --rebase" (which many people configure to
be the default pull behavior), it would undo Uwe-commit, put
Alice-commit as top of the branch, and then replay Uwe-commit on top.

What does "hg pull -u" do in that situation?  The docs are very sparse.

>  hg fetch
>
> pulls and merges 

"hg fetch" is a deprecated extension.

> Which seems the same as you see.

Yes, looks correct.

Bye,
Tassilo