Elijah Newren wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Jonathan Watt <jwatt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > On Sun, 23 Mar 2008, Jonathan Watt wrote: >> > >> >> There seems to be a problem with git-push when the working copy of the >> >> directory being pushed to came from the magic revision HEAD, but not >> >> when the working copy came from some other revision. >> > >> > http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitFaq#head-b96f48bc9c925074be9f95c0fce69bcece5f6e73 >> > >> > Sidenote: I am constantly amazed how people have no problem accepting that >> > a CVS-Server has no working directory, but all of a sudden think that a >> > Git-server should have one, and auto-update it. >> >> Hi Dscho. I think you've misread my email. (Or not read it. ;-)) I do not expect >> git-push to update the working copy of the repository being pushed to. In fact >> my complaint would be more that it *does* appear to modify the working copy >> (well, not so much modify the working copy as get confused about which revision >> the working copy came from) when the working copy came from HEAD. > > Ah, I hadn't thought of it that way before. I think you are > suggesting that pushing to the active branch of a repository with an > associated working copy should cause the HEAD to become detached. Is > that right? To be honest, I'm not sure what you mean by "HEAD to become detached". If you mean that the git-push should, if necessary, stop associating the working copy with HEAD if it's going to change HEAD, then absolutely. It wasn't the same solution as I was thinking of (stop associating the working copy with HEAD and instead associate it with the sha1 HEAD currently points to), but I guess it's the same result. :-) Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
