On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 12:49:08PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: [...] > > I pondered about `git name-rev` but failed to figure out how to make it accept > > just "HEAD" as the point of reference. Passing it "--refs=HEAD" > > (or "--refs HEAD", FWIW) does not appear to do what I'd expect it to: a couple > > of top commits are not annotated at all, and then they start to get annotated > > relative to "origin/HEAD". Note that I've tested this on a detached HEAD which > > contains an unmerged line of history. > > Right. The problem is that it gets the set of possible ref tips with > for_each_ref(), which will not include HEAD. And then worse, since the > argument to "--refs" is a pattern, it matches junk like origin/HEAD. Do I assume correctly that `git for-each-ref HEAD` does nothing, successfully, for the very same reason? If so, I wonder if this should be somehow reflected in the docs. I mean, I have always maintained an impression that things like HEAD, ORIGIN_HEAD, FETCH_HEAD etc are also "refs" - because they, well, reference commits or branches. The gitglossary manual page of my Git 2.30.2 states that | ref | A name that begins with refs/ (e.g. refs/heads/master) | <...> | There are a few special-purpose refs that do not begin with refs/. | The most notable example is HEAD. which suggests that HEAD is a ref.
