* Head, Branch != Head -> Branch?
@ 2019-12-14 18:00 Tomas Zubiri
2019-12-14 21:56 ` Tomas Zubiri
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Zubiri @ 2019-12-14 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
Hello, I'm writing because I believe I found a case where git could be
simplified. I'm posting my terminal log so that you can see exactly
what I saw. Comments are marked with >> . Important spanish git was
translated.
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git status
HEAD detached at 54da1ac
Cambios no rastreados para el commit:
(usa "git add <archivo>..." para actualizar lo que será confirmado)
(usa "git checkout -- <archivo>..." para descartar los cambios en el
directorio de trabajo)
modificado: cv/en/index.html
modificado: cv/index.html
sin cambios agregados al commit (usa "git add" y/o "git commit -a")
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git add cv/en/index.html
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git add cv/index.html
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git commit -m
"Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam"
[HEAD detached 82b2b55] Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
(HEAD detached), use
git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push origin ^C
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 82b2b55b3f7768a60e3d8bcda97d4d623ff0e044 (HEAD)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>> This is the commit I wanted to push
commit 54da1ac07a5c7c2e7234911a0af76aee042b5b99
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 20:33:11 2019 -0300
Limpio url para cv en inglés.
>> This is an abandoned commit I didn't push.
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>> This is what's in production
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout origin/master^C
>> ^C cancels the command, I notice there's an extra commit.
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch newmaster
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout origin/master
La posición previa de HEAD era 82b2b55 Agrego mi celular, por favor no
me manden spam
>> Previous head position was..
HEAD está ahora en 81542e7 especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git cherry-pick newmaster
[HEAD desacoplado 912c91a] Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>> Looks good.
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch master
fatal: Una rama llamada 'master' ya existe.
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch -D master
Eliminada la rama master (era 679eaf3)..
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch master
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push^C
>> Gotta double check.
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
>> Fatal: You are not currently on a branch.
Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
(HEAD desacoplado), use
git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push origin/master
fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
(HEAD desacoplado), use
git push origin/master HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push ^Cigin/master
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push >> So
confused I repeated a command.
fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
(HEAD desacoplado), use
git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
>> Fatal: Not currently on a branch
Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
(HEAD desacoplado), use
git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout master
Cambiado a rama 'master'
>> Now on 'master' branch
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
fatal: La rama actual master no tiene una rama upstream.
>> This error message is something I would expect, since I deleted the master branch and created a new one. That's ok.
Para realizar un push de la rama actual y configurar el remoto como
upstream, use
git push --set-upstream origin master
(base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD -> master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
Thank you for stepping in my shoes for a moment here. I understand now
that Head is a special kind of tag and it must be attached to a
branch. But I don't yet understand why the distinction between head
attached to branch and head and branch in the same commit is
necessary. Couple that to the fact that git forgot (perhaps with good
cause) what remote master pointed to, it feels like this is a place
where git could improve in simplicity.
My naive suggestion would be as follows:
When HEAD is pointing to a commit and another branch is pointing to
the same commit, consider the head attached to that commit.
I understand that, if there were multiple branches on the same commit,
git wouldn't know what remote to push to, so in such case a
disambiguation would be needed, but the case here would be that we are
on 2 branches, not none!
What am I missing here? Would this change have catastrophic consequences?
Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Head, Branch != Head -> Branch?
2019-12-14 18:00 Head, Branch != Head -> Branch? Tomas Zubiri
@ 2019-12-14 21:56 ` Tomas Zubiri
2019-12-14 22:41 ` mattr94
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Zubiri @ 2019-12-14 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: git
After going through the code and thinking about this. I think the
unexpected results came from git branch not checking out the branch I
created.
I know git checkout -b master would have been the result I wanted. If
I were to create another commit with HEAD checked out instead of
master, master would not update, only HEAD would.
I guess the real crime here is that git branch does not checkout the
branch created. I don't think I ever wanted to create a branch without
checking it out, otherwise I would use git tag.
Tomas Zubiri
Software Developer
Cel: +54 911 5891 8239
El sáb., 14 de dic. de 2019 a la(s) 15:00, Tomas Zubiri
(me@tomaszubiri.com) escribió:
>
> Hello, I'm writing because I believe I found a case where git could be
> simplified. I'm posting my terminal log so that you can see exactly
> what I saw. Comments are marked with >> . Important spanish git was
> translated.
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git status
> HEAD detached at 54da1ac
> Cambios no rastreados para el commit:
> (usa "git add <archivo>..." para actualizar lo que será confirmado)
> (usa "git checkout -- <archivo>..." para descartar los cambios en el
> directorio de trabajo)
>
> modificado: cv/en/index.html
> modificado: cv/index.html
>
> sin cambios agregados al commit (usa "git add" y/o "git commit -a")
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git add cv/en/index.html
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git add cv/index.html
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git commit -m
> "Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam"
> [HEAD detached 82b2b55] Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
> fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
> Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
> (HEAD detached), use
>
> git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push origin ^C
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 82b2b55b3f7768a60e3d8bcda97d4d623ff0e044 (HEAD)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
> >> This is the commit I wanted to push
>
> commit 54da1ac07a5c7c2e7234911a0af76aee042b5b99
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 20:33:11 2019 -0300
>
> Limpio url para cv en inglés.
> >> This is an abandoned commit I didn't push.
>
>
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
> >> This is what's in production
>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout origin/master^C
> >> ^C cancels the command, I notice there's an extra commit.
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch newmaster
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout origin/master
> La posición previa de HEAD era 82b2b55 Agrego mi celular, por favor no
> me manden spam
> >> Previous head position was..
>
> HEAD está ahora en 81542e7 especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git cherry-pick newmaster
> [HEAD desacoplado 912c91a] Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
> >> Looks good.
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch master
> fatal: Una rama llamada 'master' ya existe.
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch -D master
> Eliminada la rama master (era 679eaf3)..
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git branch master
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push^C
> >> Gotta double check.
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
> fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
> >> Fatal: You are not currently on a branch.
>
> Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
> (HEAD desacoplado), use
>
> git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push origin/master
> fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
> Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
> (HEAD desacoplado), use
>
> git push origin/master HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push ^Cigin/master
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push >> So
> confused I repeated a command.
> fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
> Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
> (HEAD desacoplado), use
>
> git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD, master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
> fatal: Actualmente no estás en una rama.
> >> Fatal: Not currently on a branch
>
> Para hacer un push a la historia que lleva al estado actual
> (HEAD desacoplado), use
>
> git push origin HEAD:<nombre-de-rama-remota>
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git checkout master
> Cambiado a rama 'master'
> >> Now on 'master' branch
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git push
> fatal: La rama actual master no tiene una rama upstream.
> >> This error message is something I would expect, since I deleted the master branch and created a new one. That's ok.
>
> Para realizar un push de la rama actual y configurar el remoto como
> upstream, use
>
> git push --set-upstream origin master
>
> (base) tomas@toms:~/Projects/tomaszubiri.com/site$ git log
> commit 912c91a92e17de33247e2040d1dd01adbfc218eb (HEAD -> master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Dec 13 21:37:30 2019 -0300
>
> Agrego mi celular, por favor no me manden spam
>
> commit 81542e725149ba5da36560ad14d4871eb7ea01e6 (origin/master)
> Author: Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 18 17:08:50 2019 -0300
>
> especifico tecnologías de contribución de codigo
>
>
> Thank you for stepping in my shoes for a moment here. I understand now
> that Head is a special kind of tag and it must be attached to a
> branch. But I don't yet understand why the distinction between head
> attached to branch and head and branch in the same commit is
> necessary. Couple that to the fact that git forgot (perhaps with good
> cause) what remote master pointed to, it feels like this is a place
> where git could improve in simplicity.
>
> My naive suggestion would be as follows:
>
> When HEAD is pointing to a commit and another branch is pointing to
> the same commit, consider the head attached to that commit.
> I understand that, if there were multiple branches on the same commit,
> git wouldn't know what remote to push to, so in such case a
> disambiguation would be needed, but the case here would be that we are
> on 2 branches, not none!
>
> What am I missing here? Would this change have catastrophic consequences?
>
> Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* RE: Head, Branch != Head -> Branch?
2019-12-14 21:56 ` Tomas Zubiri
@ 2019-12-14 22:41 ` mattr94
2019-12-15 3:32 ` Tomas Zubiri
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: mattr94 @ 2019-12-14 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Tomas Zubiri', git
After going through the code and thinking about this. I think the unexpected results came from git branch not checking out the branch I created.
I know git checkout -b master would have been the result I wanted. If I were to create another commit with HEAD checked out instead of master, master would not update, only HEAD would.
> I guess the real crime here is that git branch does not checkout the branch created. I don't think I ever wanted to create a branch without checking it out, otherwise I would use git tag.
The problem with this is that git tag doesn't create a new branch, but rather just a new tag so running something like:
git tag my-tag
git checkout my-tag
git add .
git commit -m "message"
wouldn't update my-tag either, you would need to create a new branch for that. Sometimes I want to create a branch without checking it out, as I'm sure many other users do. Is it an issue of documentation where maybe the behavior isn't clear? It does specifically say this in the description of git branch, but to be fair it is buried 6 paragraphs in
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Head, Branch != Head -> Branch?
2019-12-14 22:41 ` mattr94
@ 2019-12-15 3:32 ` Tomas Zubiri
[not found] ` <CAPYjA5YsLyeZvimsUqJpcyNCybVFK2+mKRskjQ79OKJHffdSLg@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Zubiri @ 2019-12-15 3:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: mattr94, git
It was just a combination of an old gripe I have with expecting git
branch to checkout and conflating (HEAD pointing to a commit and
branch pointing to a commit) with (HEAD pointing to a branch pointing
to a commit).
In what scenarios would you create a new branch and not check it out?
Is there a scenario where you would do this in detached head mode?
---
Could HEAD attach itself to a nearby branch whenever a command
requiring an attached branch is called and HEAD points to a commit
with only 1 branch attached to it? This would not include commit,
since it does not require an attached branch and thus would not fail
on detached mode, this should not break bc because it only affects
commands that would otherwise throw an error.
Alternatively, a more specific error message could be printed,
prompting the user to attach their head to the branch on the commit.
Regards.
El sáb., 14 de dic. de 2019 a la(s) 19:41, <mattr94@gmail.com> escribió:
>
>
> After going through the code and thinking about this. I think the unexpected results came from git branch not checking out the branch I created.
> I know git checkout -b master would have been the result I wanted. If I were to create another commit with HEAD checked out instead of master, master would not update, only HEAD would.
> > I guess the real crime here is that git branch does not checkout the branch created. I don't think I ever wanted to create a branch without checking it out, otherwise I would use git tag.
>
> The problem with this is that git tag doesn't create a new branch, but rather just a new tag so running something like:
>
> git tag my-tag
> git checkout my-tag
> git add .
> git commit -m "message"
>
> wouldn't update my-tag either, you would need to create a new branch for that. Sometimes I want to create a branch without checking it out, as I'm sure many other users do. Is it an issue of documentation where maybe the behavior isn't clear? It does specifically say this in the description of git branch, but to be fair it is buried 6 paragraphs in
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Head, Branch != Head -> Branch?
[not found] ` <CAPYjA5YsLyeZvimsUqJpcyNCybVFK2+mKRskjQ79OKJHffdSLg@mail.gmail.com>
@ 2019-12-15 5:36 ` Joshua Teves
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joshua Teves @ 2019-12-15 5:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tomas Zubiri, git
Tomas,
> In what scenarios would you create a new branch and not check it out?
These are some examples of cases where I want to make but not checkout
a new branch:
1. I've made a backup branch in case I'm about to screw up the one I'm
on and want to be able to get back to the branch's current state.
2. I want a branch at this point because I'm planning on doing working
on multiple, independent features from the same point and don't know
when they'll be merged together, and I can only work on each one a
little at the time. It's nice because I can branch from a point that's
stable.
> Is there a scenario where you would do this in detached head mode?
Someone may want to be in detached mode to check out a bug behavior at
some commit without modifying the code at all, so there's no sense in
making a new branch.
---
> Could HEAD attach itself to a nearby branch whenever a command
> requiring an attached branch is called and HEAD points to a commit
> with only 1 branch attached to it? This would not include commit,
> since it does not require an attached branch and thus would not fail
> on detached mode, this should not break bc because it only affects
> commands that would otherwise throw an error.
If they change their mind once detached, it's simple enough to
reattach by just making a new branch where they're checked out. But if
you don't do that, how is git supposed to select a name? There's no
way to pick a good one other than the current SHA... which is exactly
how you'd place yourself currently.
> Alternatively, a more specific error message could be printed,
> prompting the user to attach their head to the branch on the commit.
There actually IS a very clear prompt to reattach:
"If you want to create a new branch to retain commits you create, you may
do so (now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
git checkout -b <new-branch-name>"
Lastly, being in a detached state isn't an error, so I don't see why
an error message needs to be printed. It's quite clear that you're not
attached to any branch in particular, and it's quite clear when you
run git branch what SHA you're on and that you're detached. I as a
user would never want git to try and decide to attach itself to a new
branch, it might make the wrong choice and aggravate me. As it stands
the documentation and resulting text from commands are both quite
clear in my opinion.
mattr94,
I do agree that this is outside a new user's expectation, as Tomas has
stated, because I've taught many people git and this is a common
surprise. However, it's adequately documented and frequently covered
in tutorials. Moreoever, the commands are consistent: checkout checks
out a particular commit/branch, branch creates branches. Perhaps the
documentation could be added removing the newline between note and the
line above, so there's less of a separation between them? That would
do a better job of drawing the reader's eye to the note as being
related. (PS, I only count 4 paragraphs, but maybe I'm looking at the
wrong version?.. sorry if so).
Best,
Josh
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 12:33 AM Joshua Teves <jbtevespro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Tomas,
> > In what scenarios would you create a new branch and not check it out?
>
> These are some examples of cases where I want to make but not checkout a new branch:
> 1. I've made a backup branch in case I'm about to screw up the one I'm on and want to be able to get back to the branch's current state.
> 2. I want a branch at this point because I'm planning on doing working on multiple, independent features from the same point and don't know when they'll be merged together, and I can only work on each one a little at the time. It's nice because I can branch from a point that's stable.
>
> > Is there a scenario where you would do this in detached head mode?
>
> Someone may want to be in detached mode to check out a bug behavior at some commit without modifying the code at all, so there's no sense in making a new branch.
>
> ---
> > Could HEAD attach itself to a nearby branch whenever a command
> > requiring an attached branch is called and HEAD points to a commit
> > with only 1 branch attached to it? This would not include commit,
> > since it does not require an attached branch and thus would not fail
> > on detached mode, this should not break bc because it only affects
> > commands that would otherwise throw an error.
>
> If they change their mind once detached, it's simple enough to reattach by just making a new branch where they're checked out. But if you don't do that, how is git supposed to select a name? There's no way to pick a good one other than the current SHA... which is exactly how you'd place yourself currently.
>
> > Alternatively, a more specific error message could be printed,
> > prompting the user to attach their head to the branch on the commit.
>
> There actually IS a very clear prompt to reattach:
> "If you want to create a new branch to retain commits you create, you may
> do so (now or later) by using -b with the checkout command again. Example:
>
> git checkout -b <new-branch-name>"
>
> Lastly, being in a detached state isn't an error, so I don't see why an error message needs to be printed. It's quite clear that you're not attached to any branch in particular, and it's quite clear when you run git branch what SHA you're on and that you're detached. I as a user would never want git to try and decide to attach itself to a new branch, it might make the wrong choice and aggravate me. As it stands the documentation and resulting text from commands are both quite clear in my opinion.
>
> mattr94,
> I do agree that this is outside a new user's expectation, as Tomas has stated, because I've taught many people git and this is a common surprise. However, it's adequately documented and frequently covered in tutorials. Moreoever, the commands are consistent: checkout checks out a particular commit/branch, branch creates branches. Perhaps the documentation could be added removing the newline between note and the line above, so there's less of a separation between them? That would do a better job of drawing the reader's eye to the note as being related. (PS, I only count 4 paragraphs, but maybe I'm looking at the wrong version?.. sorry if so).
>
> Best,
> Josh
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2019 at 10:40 PM Tomas Zubiri <me@tomaszubiri.com> wrote:
>>
>> It was just a combination of an old gripe I have with expecting git
>> branch to checkout and conflating (HEAD pointing to a commit and
>> branch pointing to a commit) with (HEAD pointing to a branch pointing
>> to a commit).
>>
>> In what scenarios would you create a new branch and not check it out?
>> Is there a scenario where you would do this in detached head mode?
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Could HEAD attach itself to a nearby branch whenever a command
>> requiring an attached branch is called and HEAD points to a commit
>> with only 1 branch attached to it? This would not include commit,
>> since it does not require an attached branch and thus would not fail
>> on detached mode, this should not break bc because it only affects
>> commands that would otherwise throw an error.
>> Alternatively, a more specific error message could be printed,
>> prompting the user to attach their head to the branch on the commit.
>>
>> Regards.
>> El sáb., 14 de dic. de 2019 a la(s) 19:41, <mattr94@gmail.com> escribió:
>> >
>> >
>> > After going through the code and thinking about this. I think the unexpected results came from git branch not checking out the branch I created.
>> > I know git checkout -b master would have been the result I wanted. If I were to create another commit with HEAD checked out instead of master, master would not update, only HEAD would.
>> > > I guess the real crime here is that git branch does not checkout the branch created. I don't think I ever wanted to create a branch without checking it out, otherwise I would use git tag.
>> >
>> > The problem with this is that git tag doesn't create a new branch, but rather just a new tag so running something like:
>> >
>> > git tag my-tag
>> > git checkout my-tag
>> > git add .
>> > git commit -m "message"
>> >
>> > wouldn't update my-tag either, you would need to create a new branch for that. Sometimes I want to create a branch without checking it out, as I'm sure many other users do. Is it an issue of documentation where maybe the behavior isn't clear? It does specifically say this in the description of git branch, but to be fair it is buried 6 paragraphs in
>> >
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-15 5:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-12-14 18:00 Head, Branch != Head -> Branch? Tomas Zubiri
2019-12-14 21:56 ` Tomas Zubiri
2019-12-14 22:41 ` mattr94
2019-12-15 3:32 ` Tomas Zubiri
[not found] ` <CAPYjA5YsLyeZvimsUqJpcyNCybVFK2+mKRskjQ79OKJHffdSLg@mail.gmail.com>
2019-12-15 5:36 ` Joshua Teves
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).