On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 4:06 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I was leaning towards something like that plus a Documentation update, but > > noticed that the current behaviour was inconsistent, and the confusion > > pointed out by Junio seems to indicate it is better if fully restricted. > > That is a bad move, as existing repositories may have a ref with > such a name. but if they do, it is currently "ambiguous" as you pointed out, and my patch still allows the use of @ when it is not ambiguous : $ git branch @/1 @ so Stefano[1] is safe, and anyone that has such a ref is better of renaming it anyway (which is something I agree we have to add code to my patch to allow somehow) > If we tighten anything retroactively, we probably should forgid '@' > short-hand that stands for HEAD, I would think. regardless of the merits of that feature, it has been in git since ~v1.8.4, so its removal will also be breaking the user experience IMHO. Carlo [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/520BC017.7050907@xxxxxxxxx/
