Re: Fwd: ephemeral-branches instead of detached-head?

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

 



David Jeske <davidj@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> When you do "git commit --amend",
>> the current commit will become dangling (in the sense that it's not
>> referred by any ref, but the commit exists) and those are just noise
>> in my opinion.
>
> This is *exactly* my point.
>
> There is no way to distinguish a commit which was accidentally and
> implicitly dangled due to checkout or submodule update on a detached
> head, from all those other intentionally dangling refs which were
> explicitly handled with merge, rebase, amend.

I do not follow.  Just like "commit --amend", checking out another
branch to leave a detached HEAD _is_ an explicit way to discard what
you started experimenting behind, declaring it useless.  Otherwise
you would have saved it to some named branch.

This of course assumes that, as you said in one of your earlier
messages, the user knows what he is doing, though.
--
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]