Hi,
On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > > On Tue, 23 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > >
> > >> And we might want to allow reflogs on detached HEAD someday,
> > >> although I personally think it goes against what detached HEAD
> > >> is -- it is of a very temporary nature.
> > >
> > > Didn't we agree already that reflog with detached head was simply
> > > insane?
> >
> > Perhaps, perhaps not.
> >
> > $ git checkout v2.6.14
> > $ git checkout v2.6.15
> > $ git checkout v2.6.16
> >
> > Ah, which one did I check-out the last time?
> >
> > $ git describe HEAD@{1}
>
> And what does HEAD@{1} means if not detached?
>
> If there is a reflog for HEAD independently of what branch HEAD is
> attached to then it could make sense. Meaning that if you're on branch
> "master" and perform a commit, then both reflogs for "master" and "HEAD"
> are updated at the same time. If you then checkout branch "next" then
> only the "HEAD" reflog is updated since no changes to any branch did
> occur but just HEAD changed.
>
> Then moving around and/or committing with a detached head would just
> update the "HEAD reflog.
This would also be my idea. I agree with you that mixing approaches like
Jakub proposed is insane.
But given the idea of reflogs ("Where was this yesterday"), I think it
would make sense to reflog HEAD -- independent on which branch it happens
to refer to.
Warning! It _changes_ the behaviour. As of now, "git log --walk-reflogs
HEAD" shows the local view of the _branch_ that HEAD points to
_currently_. But I think that the current is difficult to explain to new
users, whereas the "jumping HEAD" is not.
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