On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 8:28 AM Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:29 AM Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 2:01 PM Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > v3 sees switch-branch go back to switch-branch (in v2 it was > > > checkout-branch). checkout-files is also renamed restore-files (v1 was > > > restore-paths). Hopefully we won't see another rename. > > > > I started reading through the patches. I also tried to apply them > > locally, but they had conflicts or missing base file version on both > > master and next. What version did you base it on? > > I think nd/checkout-dwim-fix because of a non-trivial conflict there > (but I don't remember when I noticed it and rebased on that). Anyway > you can get the whole series at > > https://gitlab.com/pclouds/git/tree/switch-branch-and-checkout-files > > It fixes some of your comments already, a couple of bug fixes here and > there and in a good-enough shape that I start actually using it. Cool. > > > - Two more fancy features (the "git checkout --index" being the > > > default mode and the backup log for accidental overwrites) are of > > > course still missing. But they are coming. > > > > > > I did not go replace "detached HEAD" with "unnamed branch" (or "no > > > branch") everywhere because I think a unique term is still good to > > > refer to this concept. Or maybe "no branch" is good enough. I dunno. > > > > I personally like "unnamed branch", but "no branch" would still be > > better than "detached HEAD". > > Haven't really worked on killing the term "detached HEAD" yet. But I > noticed the other day that git-branch reports > > * (HEAD detached from 703266f6e4) > > and I didn't know how to rephrase that. I guess "unnamed branch from > 703266f6e4" is probably good enough but my old-timer brain screams no. Perhaps "* (On an unnamed branch, at 703266f6e4)"?
