From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: [RFC] Detached-HEAD reminder on commit? Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:35:47 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: References: <1220383905-48316-1-git-send-email-pdebie@ai.rug.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Pieter de Bie , Git Mailinglist To: Matthieu Moy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 02 22:37:51 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kaccz-0006ve-Nm for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:37:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751061AbYIBUgX (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2008 16:36:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751499AbYIBUgX (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2008 16:36:23 -0400 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:10748 "EHLO relais.videotron.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751000AbYIBUgW (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2008 16:36:22 -0400 Received: from xanadu.home ([66.131.194.97]) by VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-4.01 (built Aug 3 2007; 32bit)) with ESMTP id <0K6L00HIQ57NI0C1@VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca> for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2008 16:35:48 -0400 (EDT) X-X-Sender: nico@xanadu.home In-reply-to: User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (LFD 962 2008-03-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Pieter de Bie writes: > > > + if (!strcmp("HEAD", head)) > > + printf("You are on a detached head, so this commit " > > + "has not been recorded in a branch.\n" > > + "If you don't want to lose this commit, checkout a " > > + "branch and then run:\n" > > + " git merge %s\n", sha1_to_hex(sha1)); > > I'd say > > + "If you don't want to lose this commit, run " > + "git branch \n" > + "to create a named branch for the commit you just made"); > > (or whatever better wording you find, but I think suggesting to name > the branch makes more sense that merging it) Agreed. Something that repeat more or less the message that was given when detaching HEAD in the first place would be best. Nicolas