From: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Detached HEAD (experimental)
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2007 13:43:16 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zm8ryiyz.wl%cworth@cworth.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070109213117.GB25012@fieldses.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1887 bytes --]
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 16:31:17 -0500, "J. Bruce Fields" wrote:
> > > git checkout v1.4.0
> > > hack hack hack
> > > git commit -m -a 'some changes which will never be seen again'
> > > git checkout v1.2.0
> > >
> > > I thought the _point_ of the safety valve was not to lose those changes.
...
> Stupid question: why can't checkout do something like this?
>
> if we're currently not on a branch, fail if .git/PREV
> doesn't point to the same commit as .git/HEAD.
>
> if we're checking out a non-branch, store its SHA1 into
> .git/PREV.
I would guess the problem is that this would still cause warnings even
if the user had since given a name (created a branch) for the commits
originally made to the dangling head.
Frankly, I don't understand why so much effort is being put toward
allowing these "fragile commits" to be made in the first place. Why
not require users to name the branch before creating any commits, just
as has always been the case?
To me, the only real advantage to the new "detached head" stuff is
simply making it easier to checkout previous state without having to
name a new branch precisely _because_ the user has not intent to
commit anything. If the user is going to commit something, then the
user should be able to come up with a name for the branch.
But, whatever, if allowing fragile commits is seen as important by
those doing the work, who am I to complain about that? I'd just ask
that the following not be made slow:
git checkout commit-from-beginning-of-time
git checkout master
Thanks to the index, and the simplicity of what "git checkout" means,
checkout has always been blisteringly fast. All the talk of doing
reachability analysis scares me from a performance point of view,
(particularly when the _interesting_ cases (to me) of checkouts to
non-branches never need this anyway---since no commits will be made).
Thanks,
-Carl
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-01-09 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-01-02 7:45 [PATCH] Detached HEAD (experimental) Junio C Hamano
2007-01-02 19:59 ` Edgar Toernig
2007-01-02 21:56 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-02 22:18 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-03 0:34 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-06 18:58 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-06 20:48 ` Alan Chandler
2007-01-06 22:52 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-02 22:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-02 23:34 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-03 2:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-08 11:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-08 13:17 ` Jeff King
2007-01-09 0:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 0:43 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-09 1:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 1:15 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-09 3:26 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-09 7:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 10:41 ` [PATCH 0/6] Expose in_merge_bases() via merge-base Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 8:12 ` [PATCH] Detached HEAD (experimental) Luben Tuikov
2007-01-09 14:21 ` Jeff King
2007-01-09 21:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 21:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-09 21:43 ` Carl Worth [this message]
2007-01-09 21:53 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-09 23:44 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 0:26 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-10 0:34 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 1:03 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-10 1:07 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 1:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-01-10 1:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 1:40 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 1:54 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-01-10 2:28 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 1:37 ` Jakub Narebski
2007-01-10 9:08 ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-01-10 9:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 16:30 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-01-11 9:45 ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-01-10 9:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 22:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-09 23:39 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-09 23:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-10 0:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 0:18 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 0:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-01-10 0:51 ` Carl Worth
2007-01-10 8:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 9:04 ` Andy Parkins
2007-01-10 9:05 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 9:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 10:10 ` Andy Parkins
2007-01-10 10:25 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-10 16:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-10 14:04 ` Jeff King
2007-01-11 0:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-11 4:31 ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-01-03 10:46 ` Jeff King
2007-01-03 11:59 ` Jeff King
2007-01-02 23:22 ` [PATCH] git-branch: show detached HEAD Lars Hjemli
2007-01-03 5:18 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-01-03 6:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-03 7:50 ` Lars Hjemli
2007-01-03 7:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-03 7:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-01-03 7:37 ` Lars Hjemli
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87zm8ryiyz.wl%cworth@cworth.org \
--to=cworth@cworth.org \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).