Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 10.03.2015 03:03: > Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 06.03.2015 20:03: >>> Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>> Note that now a checked branch is listed twice, once as target of the >>>> HEAD, once as branch: They are two different refs and colored differently. >>> >>> The pointee of HEAD would always be branch and will always appear on >>> the output when you show HEAD->$name_of_that_branch; is it feasible >>> to drop the duplicate, I wonder? >> >> It's doable but not nice, because we cannot take the order in which refs >> are processed for granted. > > That is true, but when we format them into a single line in the > header in response to --decorate (or %d), don't we have all of them > already at hand---does the order still matter? > > Here is an illustration of what I had in mind, made on a random > commit I happened to have checked out that does not have your > patches on this topic. Half of the change is a new helper function, > and the other half is mostly reindenting. Yes, the patch illustrates pretty well what I meant by "doable but not nice" :) But I also said: > Also, HEAD and foo are two different refs, so even if HEAD has the value > "foo", I think we should really show them both anyways. > > Alternatively, we could decorate by (HEAD, *foo, master, tag: release) > if foo is checked out, just like branch does. I guess I will have to apply your patch and feel what it's like in practical use in order to change my mind... Michael -- 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