Hi, On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > >> * Reflog > >> > >> - Reflog records the history of where the tip of each branch > >> was at each moment. > > > > It might make sense to reformulate that: > > > > Reflog records the history from the view point of the local > > repository. In other words, regardless of the real history, > > the reflog shows the history as seen by one particular repository > > (this enables you to ask "what was the current revision in _this_ > > repository, yesterday at 1pm?"). > > I think that _both_ sentences are right. Reflog records history of where the > tip of each branch was at each moment, logging also what command was used > to move tip of branch (was it commit, amending commit, rebase, reset, or > creating branch anew, git-am or pull). > > But where tip of each branch was is purely local matter. What is global > is DAG of commits, refs are always as seen by one particular repository. What I meant was: people not familiar with git development will probably not understand the shorter, concise statement. They will not know off-hand that there is a difference between the history of development, and the history, as seen from the local repository's viewpoint. So of course, both sentences are right. Your point -- that reflog also records the action -- is less important IMHO. It is just meta-data of the local view. To your second point: the global history remains global, of course. But this is what you _usually_ refer to, when talking about the development history, anyway. Therefore, to motivate reflogs, you should point out the differences between local and global history. And this means to at least _mention_ the word "local". Ciao, Dscho - 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