Carl Worth wrote: > Also, since the git names are so predictable, git almost never emits > them. It accepts them as names just fine, but it doesn't generate > them, (log, and commit never show the branch-specific names). I think > the only git command that even can emit such a name was a recently > added git-name-rev which exists solely for the purpose of mapping a > commit identifier to a local, branch-specific name which might have > more intuitive meaning for the user. git-show-branch also shows git-name-rev like names. BTW. git-show-branch has somewhat strange, and different from other git commands UI. You can think of it as text version of gitk/qgit history viewer (although you can use tig for CLI (ncurses) graph). -- Jakub Narebski Poland - 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