Re: [PATCH] logging branch deletion to help recovering from mistakes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Casey Dahlin wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 11:45:20AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Casey Dahlin wrote:
>
>>>> Could commits made onto a detached head also show up here? Or is that
>>>> better thwarted with another mechanism?
>>>
>>> I think that's better thwarted with the HEAD reflog:
>>> 
>>> 	$ git log -g HEAD
>>
>> I was more worried about changes that were made onto a detached head,
>> and then the head was reattached, leaving the new commits dangling.
>
> But isn't that exactly what a detached HEAD is for?  If one wants
> the experiments one does on detached HEAD to be kept around "just
> in case", wouldn't it make more sense to give them a (branch) name so
> they can be separated from one another?

What are you arguing after giving a correct answer.  "git log -g HEAD"
keeps track of what was at the tip of HEAD, be it pointing at a branch or
pointing diretly at a commit in a detached state, no?
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]