From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Question about 'branch -d' safety Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:50:32 -0700 Message-ID: <7v39vo8dkn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20091230065442.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com> <20100711065505.GA19606@localhost> <201007110916.29567.jnareb@gmail.com> <20100711133730.GA10338@localhost> <7v1vb9hnd9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20100712184754.GA18429@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jakub Narebski , Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Sebrecht , Nanako Shiraishi To: Clemens Buchacher X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 13 01:50:55 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OYSlx-0003Cj-QW for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2010 01:50:54 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752280Ab0GLXut (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:50:49 -0400 Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:62920 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751860Ab0GLXus (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:50:48 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCB1C45FD; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:50:47 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Xka9pdjkBp0hPVZ31DMX0x0c0Vs=; b=Gqo1mV g9MVzy/nZolzROIWkOVcJK+NKJ7IbG9UFNKZQ9NkUxTM4oKWUOnFFNX2uZxMocZ9 Y71ReoHR/sfE3rQUCNS2CU80pS3r8MDOJjBr8WbbujdcVyMUVEERllvOi7BwQ+JC zB9ExQlMSHyi1uDJUQ+FPQJdBNpljWV9DvNOE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=M2nAvpVBAZnL1SXSRH6sN9dd8pGPMgeP bPvJPGI9weT97S5RU/ZP0y7yISdHbGamF+UJc/SskreeDnXvwmdHjItrpLO5OnXq 1P73c2j0wqRa7gMtVkPTqwwVOrJ74SxtXW8Wu07gNIn5uaCGHCv4dSXeQSfXF1Ft Y1lAbLNgIpY= Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F68C45FC; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:50:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [69.181.135.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 747D2C45FB; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 19:50:34 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20100712184754.GA18429@localhost> (Clemens Buchacher's message of "Mon\, 12 Jul 2010 20\:47\:55 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 478674DE-8E10-11DF-B3D4-9056EE7EF46B-77302942!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Clemens Buchacher writes: >> What problem are you guys really trying to solve? > > The reflog protects you from almost all involuntary loss of > information. And you call "git branch -[dD]" involuntary? I am not entirely unsympathetic to add "git branch --undelete frotz" to our vocabulary, but then we should leave users an easy way to really remove things, and it shouldn't be "git branch -d --i-really-mean-it frotz". It would probably be more like "git branch -d frotz" followed by "git branch --purge frotz" or "git branch --purge \*" (if we name the operation to remove cruft for undelete "purge", that is).