Hi Junio, On Mon, 10 Nov 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > >> I do not think of a good justification of detachInstead offhand, but > >> you must have thought things through a lot more than I did, so you > >> can come up with a work flow description that is more usable by mere > >> mortals to justify that mode. > > > > The main justification is that it is safer than updateInstead because > > it is guaranteed not to modify the working directory. I intended it > > for use by developers who are uncomfortable with updating the working > > directory through a push, and as uncomfortable with forgetting about > > temporary branches pushed, say, via "git push other-computer > > HEAD:refs/heads/tmp". > > > > However, I have to admit that I never used this myself after the first > > few weeks of playing with this patch series. > > > >> Without such a description to justify why detachInstead makes sense, > >> for example, I cannot even answer this simple question: > >> > >> Would it make sense to have a third mode, "check out if the > >> working tree is clean, detach otherwise"? > > > > I imagine that some developer might find that useful. If you insist, I > > will implement it, even if I personally deem this mode way too > > complicated a concept for myself to be used safely. > > You have been around long enough to know that adding a feature of an > unknown value is the last thing I would ask, don't you? Given that you actually did ask me to add such a feature when I simply wanted to get a bug fix for fast-export into Git to support Sverre's remote-hg (that he abandoned because of my failure to get the bug fix in), I have to respectfully declare that I do not know that, no, sorry! > I am essentially saying this: > > I do not see why and the patch and its documentation do not > explain why it is useful, but Dscho wouldn't have added the > feature without a reason better than "just because we can do > so", so let's assume the mode is useful for some unknown reason. > Would people find "updateInstead if able otherwise > detachInstead" even more useful for that same unknown reason? Okay, here is my explanation: at the time I wanted to disprove that updateInstead could make sense, I wanted to offer a milder version of updating the current branch that left the working directory alone: detachInstead. Now, I never used it myself, but I use updateInstead extensively. So now I offer you two choices: - help me come up with a good scenario where it makes sense to detachInstead, or - tell me to drop it. I have no preference. Ciao, Johannes -- 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