Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> master> git checkout next
> next> git branch --track mybranch @{-1}
>
> Creates "mybranch" from master, *not from next*, correct?
>
> Also, the "--track" option is an unnecessary distraction to the
> example, isn't it?
When a new branch is created in "git branch --track A B" form, B is used
in two ways.
* Obviously, the new branch A initially points at the same commit as
commit B. For this, B does not have to be the name of a branch. It
only has to be a commit-ish.
* With --track, the new branch A is marked as a fork of the branch B, but
obviously for this additional feature to kick in, you cannot give an
arbitrary commit-ish as B. It has to be the name of a branch you are
forking from.
If B were spelled @{1}, the latter does not happen, as @{1} is a way to
say "The _commit_ my current branch was pointing at before it point the
current commit". On the other hand, @{-1} is a way to say "The _branch_
I switched from my last 'git checkout' command", and the command ought to
behave the same as if you gave it a branch name, and --track takes place.
So having --track explicitly in the example is a good way to clarify the
point that @{-N} notation is a way to spell _a branch name_, and it is not
merely another commit-ish.
--
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
