Re: Should "git log --decorate" indicate whether the HEAD is detached?

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:

> "git branch" will tell you your branches and which one is checked out
> (or HEAD); "git status" will tell you the latter.
>
> "git log" is about the DAG which has absolutely nothing to do with what
> you have currently checked out.

Yeah, that summarizes my reaction, too.  More importantly, "log" is
about showing commits and "--decorate" is a way to enrich the
presentation of commits---it talks about commits in terms of refs;
the command and the option is not about describing refs and their
relationships.

I do not terribly mind showing the fact that HEAD points at a branch
when --decorate talks about HEAD, partly because we will be showing
both HEAD and the branch name _anyway_ in the output.  But I am not
sure if the extra bit of information is more helpful to the readers
or being distracting.

Julien's "HEAD=master, other" vs "HEAD, master, other" may be
subdued enough to be undistracting, I would guess.  I do not think
the distinction between "HEAD = master" and "HEAD -> master" would
be useful, on the other hand.  We already know that the names listed
all refer to the same commit, which means that we do not have to say
"HEAD is detached" explicitly as long as we have a way to say "HEAD
points at this branch".  If HEAD is listed and is not marked to
point at another branch that is shown, by definition it is detached,
no?