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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 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_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF6F211B3 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 18:31:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725866AbeLDSbV (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 13:31:21 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-f46.google.com ([209.85.217.46]:35706 "EHLO mail-vs1-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725797AbeLDSbU (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 13:31:20 -0500 Received: by mail-vs1-f46.google.com with SMTP id e7so10452569vsc.2 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 10:31:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gXgOpxwk3/fEwspW0ju2lOyMZ+UueHsaZLPo/zni1ZI=; b=EQoRZwaHXn1d/cf4tL+4HAJ+uhkzpYdwgwOerZdmudBNL8UlrFOJ9f5cTplv0blSHy Bv/54nWUo86t0uQhgvVEZO8Nj6AySYcqDgrRJPxfDfqY7aASmL5MFm0oGGS1jkKDE7Zk pojzgKvQ9RMUDEIMaQ7R910QisV3UzLJCUTEtAD0Q1VY4vhzAwrVfTPWuO2kIboGyVcI zGe0n8yzUQ0kyHQNmXIeY3csLm5+Roo5Lw/kGZzuAwra1UEebshEDdmjixeg23A2vWfa YKIH0YKy68kQ2ksxbsk+znjux7hTjO4PUcZcmxgkPUtkRpQmdRO0SF2aVwJyBa5W/EQH IMMg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gXgOpxwk3/fEwspW0ju2lOyMZ+UueHsaZLPo/zni1ZI=; b=AQPV1l9GBOo+32Sh5XG9C6RzblrHxRIrFN3XLhXweob9i3nPI2aVSwpYSIgV6aFv03 RdB17lxnj5AKAYj7g8SQuNlObKHPc2quHNo2dANsTxgRVftjGdQLuas/OKLPl5l5N9Pw gJMVDziQquJvv4mBVycjghOEm3MqodRirA63ng5zTFm/AOvSHz3NjGl+PDBfjmyAO51E GmMJQdV7ENoR8MXvxFPpft2/uSUcM2lXAJGyPkHpOWHRjqOuDYwOv4fymWk/CpkGLDeU a+CjcY8RUDsqEc02Z9ioQFj1afPyGD5LIVPePO0IU830vSFjtFtRKzwaohXLjQyL2TZf glrg== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWaN533irHVt/ucbHTzYJPgyKw8TBgJS/oIBhQ5Ha/Egj2LxgAxm qv1SKUEr7eM9oFAU4+OiwdU8XAbeIn7iGMG58Ok= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/U+e9r4qI8gkXYg7UXv/OsL7g9c0FOrGY8eDtD9EDJWuy9jwi+edMQCpqxLWvGIroQ3ZVbkqwpEUnpK6mTT62o= X-Received: by 2002:a67:3edc:: with SMTP id a89mr9257666vsi.136.1543948279201; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 10:31:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181127165211.24763-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20181129215850.7278-1-pclouds@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Elijah Newren Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 10:31:06 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v3 00/14] Introduce new commands switch-branch and restore-files To: =?UTF-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Cc: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= , Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Stefan Beller , Thomas Gummerer , Stefan Xenos Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:22 AM Duy Nguyen wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 6:45 PM Elijah Newren wrote: > > > > > - Two more fancy features (the "git checkout --index" being the > > > > > default mode and the backup log for accidental overwrites) are of > > > > > course still missing. But they are coming. > > > > > > > > > > I did not go replace "detached HEAD" with "unnamed branch" (or "no > > > > > branch") everywhere because I think a unique term is still good to > > > > > refer to this concept. Or maybe "no branch" is good enough. I dunno. > > > > > > > > I personally like "unnamed branch", but "no branch" would still be > > > > better than "detached HEAD". > > > > > > Haven't really worked on killing the term "detached HEAD" yet. But I > > > noticed the other day that git-branch reports > > > > > > * (HEAD detached from 703266f6e4) > > > > > > and I didn't know how to rephrase that. I guess "unnamed branch from > > > 703266f6e4" is probably good enough but my old-timer brain screams no. > > > > Perhaps "* (On an unnamed branch, at 703266f6e4)"? > > This 703266f6e4 is the fork point. Once you start adding more commits > on top of this unnamed branch, I find it hard to define it "at" > 703266f6e4 anymore. "forked from 703266f6e4" (or even starting/growing > from...) is probably clearest but also a bit longer. It reports the fork point rather than the commit HEAD points to? Ah, I guess I never payed that close of attention before. I actually think "on an unnamed branch" is good enough, but if others gain value from the extra info, then I understand the conundrum. I'm not sure what the use or rationale is for the fork point, though, so I feel slightly at a loss to try to describe this extra piece of info.