Daniel Barkalow <barkalow <at> iabervon.org> writes:
>
> One feature that might make git more intuitive to people is if we were to
> additionally track the history of what commit was the head of each branch
> over time. This is only vaguely related to the history of the content, but
> it's well-defined and sometimes significant.
>
> E.g., if you know that two weeks ago, what you had worked, but it doesn't
> work now, you can use git-bisect to figure out what happened, but first
> you have to figure out what commit it was that you were using two weeks
> ago. Two weeks ago, we had that information, but we didn't keep it.
On a related issue:
Looking at a commit:
commit id-commit
parent id-1
parent id-2
parent id-3
Merge branch 'branch-2', 'branch-3'
One can tell the name of the branches for id-2 and id-3 (branch-2, 3),
but one can't tell the name of id-1.
At the time, those branches were not yet merged, this information was
available easily, even remotely via git-clone.
-
: 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