On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 2:32 AM Eckhard Maaß
<eckhard.s.maass@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 10:58:46PM +0100, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> > + if (!opts->implicit_detach &&
> > + !opts->new_branch &&
> > + !opts->new_branch_force &&
> > + new_branch_info->name &&
> > + !new_branch_info->path)
> > + die(_("a branch is expected, got %s"), new_branch_info->name);
>
> Wouldn't it be nice to give more context here, for example the symbolic
> reference that the name actually points to? When expereimenting with the
> feature and trying to switch to a tag, it refuses with
> "a branch is expected, got v1.2.0". I personally would prefer something
> more like "a branch is expected, got v1.2.0 that resolved to
> refs/tags/v1.2.0", so I get "oh, yeah, that is actually a tag ...". Does
> this seem worthwhile to dig deeper into? A quick glance left me a bit
> puzzled, I admit.
Good suggestion. I'll try to report one of the following
a branch is expected, got tag 'v1.2.0'
a branch is expected, got remote branch 'origin/master'
a branch is expected, got 'refs/foo/bar'
a branch is expected, got commit 'HEAD^'
It's a bit more code, but I think it definitely helps.
--
Duy
