From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35C21F8C6 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 18:15:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231363AbhGGSRi (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:17:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34840 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231324AbhGGSRg (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jul 2021 14:17:36 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x333.google.com (mail-ot1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::333]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 571C8C061574 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 2021 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x333.google.com with SMTP id t24-20020a9d7f980000b029046f4a1a5ec4so3153696otp.1 for ; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 11:14:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1KGcpnsQ/z2h0F7JMvB8xTq4KrhfO9DkZhq0KvJxPnY=; b=Netm1k5Q++x+0PPpNgtaJoolgL2RR5v/DXJIDfzJs2c77vXecoR+DWPGb3p3Yql7gU 2NkyPn3uW8YH3MSX+4wH59yqydaSlUR7zRZYvKbGYDqyoo4Vo9HCe+55yumxyv/F9Spr RmWbVJOE/ae/svjai5XiaGGmEZAyiOuxg9jhNAzUIrc8nbW/7oiK8UX40Ny1oM+tjUpK z67Mo/EDlVFfN2fncE7Xi9PLbK40f3EB6bGSc1XQ8QuRZsGTqGHxdLlWnXtwY0U8wYf6 ydSOVqg4tZDyYsCr1bNiXTkQoefd2JaC9+7vUNRjoVw42QJJ2NCmLSTAruke4Eh2UGxB /qxA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1KGcpnsQ/z2h0F7JMvB8xTq4KrhfO9DkZhq0KvJxPnY=; b=XyySHb9bR4gZghD6cpPF4977F3pW43s9PLM+g6i7/N5ehBpIcoLsZMgRt4TTS9132P 8t1wW5RlzesQnNX8/n2TUDo1YaCUH9XEe4qn1buBtMG86MilgpGBCq76JV99izVI7jOS n0McaZDeV/XJp+o5/0j6DGko+kbamn7uMIBQSgI2SscN6eePOIOCy/otSvW+UAmgKiaN 9T2KpmbNDpqq+H3UUeavcBOsOaCC3iF8Z2A5iLg0gzkZ/dN/eilgKHrzLG91Nq/dCOnk 0YgjmOsV8wyZPWw7GOPOGbkQD93fxMaLhIT2sb3xyDIE3s+vh3rc+6IZxHdlGFfrG3M0 AAVg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533OCEiI6PlSx/RSdGK6Tpl8nAy+hV5AluIkuGeZ6Offw5+Nj4R6 UMdN5iI5r81PIwF8YkSOJ4Jb+0pvLQDn/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz+VKzO+b22mHwM19xGm7h+JIMlTQr5xeZr0PZRXfJELrCyB03zEo0OjBcPVsYYj5MKD+DGlw== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6185:: with SMTP id g5mr21129621otk.109.1625681693681; Wed, 07 Jul 2021 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (fixed-187-189-163-231.totalplay.net. [187.189.163.231]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 76sm2136214otj.28.2021.07.07.11.14.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Jul 2021 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2021 13:14:52 -0500 From: Felipe Contreras To: Martin , Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <60e5ef1c1118_30143720837@natae.notmuch> In-Reply-To: References: <7870a0ad-8fa1-9dbd-1978-1f44ec6970c5@mfriebe.de> Subject: Re: PATCH: improve git switch documentation Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Martin wrote: > Let's take a step back. How exactly is the word "branch" actually = > defined? Well it does not matter. > What matters is, how the word is used. > What does a person mean, when they speak of the branch? That is a good point. > And the answer is, it's not always clear. Indeed. > In the above conversation, we use "branch" to speak of the "pointer to = a = > single commit". > We do not include any commits, when speaking of the "branch". > (And this is how it is used in the docs, as far as I can find) This is how the term "branch" is used in git lingo. > However a lot of people use "branch" to refer to the commits within. > "Push a branch to a remote". That obviously means the objects (e.g. = > commits) in the branch. > The doc says (and yes I am getting a bit picky here) > >>> Updates remote refs using local refs, while sending objects = > necessary to complete the given refs. > "complete the given ref". The ref is given by the branch, and completin= g = > means afaik "to make something part of" > Maybe a mistake made, because "branch" is (according to my observation)= = > so commonly (mis-)used to include the objects. Yes. > Anyway, can we agree, that there are people who=C2=A0 (mistakenly) = > use/understand "branch" as including the objects? > Enough people to call it a "common mistake". > If so, then we should not ignore this. I wouldn't even call it a mistake. Other SCMs, like Mercrual, do use this second meaning: the branch is the specific commits that constitute that branch. Can we really say user thinking that way is a mistake? I'm sure Mercurial users would say git using the first notion is the a mistake. It is a bigger mental load to be thinking in the two meanings at the same time while writing the documentation, but if we really want to reach the vast majority of users we do need to consider that the user might be thinking in terms of the second notion. -- = Felipe Contreras=