On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 12:08:47AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > Its a little ugly here as I'm not sure we should always update > > HEAD's reflog if HEAD points at a branch we are actually updating. > > Maybe we should though in receive-pack ? > > If the meaning of HEAD changed (although indirectly) because HEAD > happens to point to the branch that just got updated then logically the > HEAD reflog should be updated too. On the other hand the HEAD reflog > should reflect operations performed on HEAD. Since the push updates the > branch directly it is not exactly performing some operation on HEAD > since HEAD could point anywhere and that wouldn't change the push at > all. > > Meaning that for the discussion of pushing to a non-bare repository with > a dirty working tree... If the branch being pushed into is not pointed > to by HEAD then no consideration what so ever about the working tree > should be made, and no update to the HEAD reflog made of course. Right, but if the branch being pointed to is pointed to by HEAD I would argue that the reflog for HEAD should be updated, since operations that reference HEAD will see a new commit, and and it will be confusing when "git reflog" shows no hint of the change. Of couse, if the branch being pushed to isn't one which is pointed by HEAD, of course HEAD's reflog shouldn't be updated. - Ted - 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