Hi Glen, On Wed, 2 Mar 2022, Glen Choo wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > but one random-looking hexadecimal string is almost > > indistinguishable from another, and neither would be a very useful > > message from the end user's point of view. I am wondering if we can > > use old_branch_info to formulate something easier to understand for > > the user. update_refs_for_switch() seems to compute old_desc as a > > human readable name by using old_branch_info->name if available > > before falling back to old_branch_info->commit object name, which > > might be a source of inspiration. > > I think it's actually more helpful to have the oid instead of a > human-readable description like old_branch_info->name. The most helpful would be to have both. That way, it would at least be potentially possible to figure out from a ref how to fetch a non-corrupt version from elsewhere. Ciao, Dscho
