Martin wrote: > On 11/07/2021 09:57, Sergey Organov wrote: > > Martin <git@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > > [...] > > > >> Currently only the branch is mentioned. > >> Currently nothing does explicitly say that *commits* can be affected. > > > > Commits cannot be immediately affected. One of the most essential > > features of Git is that commits could only be affected (deleted) by > > garbage collection. That's what makes Git so nicely safe in operation. > > > > It'd be unfortunate to have statements in the manual pages that > > contradict this. > > Tell that a new user, who never heard of "dangling commits" or the reflog. The user doesn't need to understand what "dangling comments" are, not at this point. All she needs is to know is that there's a concept she doesn't understand yet. > For ages, I wondered what git fsck meant by "dangling commits" and why > my repro always had "that problem". > And what I might do with that hash it gave me. Yes, but it's a thousand times better to not know what "dangling commits" are, than to incorrectly think commits are somehow gone forever. It is fine that the user has knowledge gaps, and it is fine for the user knows she has knowledge gaps. -- Felipe Contreras
