From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4247F20193 for ; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 18:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751356AbcHKSJl (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:09:41 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:53073 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751088AbcHKSJj (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:09:39 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C2F633319; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:09:38 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=NZad2UUUq04pL7h798QrBArhkZY=; b=jh1Dyc 6zaJz7LjVGKAeVASGPfxWxJIdmigQfuMN5mzge+Kad79leCcBi63etk1LQUjuAPH G1res2IhVgzYxL0FvwyNj6BmQE0a6pQ/9WaYvev/LAKY2ytv/785SY1I2qninQZA w8S+4MUWr2XJEAVqi774rkq4NX5Vbe6y1dmKs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=kOymp4/5X7uRleh3ELe5vDklyt8SiUQ3 mwQjt8IH4UJHwb+2I89JUOoIIpGsSjndTUjQt7dwbiBOqrGrCTJsAbkqFy34tx+4 qfFZiJJYG5eUMYxpCaW7YGXQzNmc/O7HVom5B/WuUzDb5KUm8vWFcmdZKnuy2F5z UhORFuJykRo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338B933318; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:09:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF25E33317; Thu, 11 Aug 2016 14:09:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: Jonathan Nieder , "git\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkout: do not mention detach advice for explicit --detach option References: <20160810172800.23575-1-sbeller@google.com> <20160810173218.GB14758@google.com> Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:09:35 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:46:11 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C40AB07C-5FEE-11E6-88BF-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Stefan Beller wrote: >> >>> When a user asked for a detached HEAD specifically with `--detach`, >>> we do not need to give advice on what a detached HEAD state entails as >>> we can assume they know what they're getting into as they asked for it. >> >> Example? Tests? > > There are no tests for the advice things IIUC. There seem to already be tests that explicitly sets advice.* to true like in t7201 and t7512, but even if there weren't any existing ones, it would be appropriate to make sure that an explicit --detach does not trigger the advice, even when advice.detachedHEAD left unconfigured (or set to true), given that doing so is the whole purpose of this patch, I would think.