From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zorba" Subject: Re: user manual question Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2008 00:48:37 -0000 Message-ID: References: To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Dec 29 01:51:03 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 1LH6LW-0006F6-O0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 01:51:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752689AbYL2AtH (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:49:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752669AbYL2AtF (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:49:05 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:55102 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752536AbYL2AtE (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Dec 2008 19:49:04 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LH6JZ-0006uk-RR for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 00:49:01 +0000 Received: from 81.135.227.136 ([81.135.227.136]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 00:49:01 +0000 Received: from cr by 81.135.227.136 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 29 Dec 2008 00:49:01 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.135.227.136 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org X-Spam-Report: 5.2 points; * 0.0 RCVD_BY_IP Received by mail server with no name * 4.0 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains an IP address used for HELO * 1.2 PRIORITY_NO_NAME Message has priority, but no X-Mailer/User-Agent Archived-At: Hi Sitaram! Thanks for clearing that one up. Also, I did wonder about HEAD and head. One can move, the other doesn't! (well, acually it does - head moves "forward", as the tip of the branch grows) you gotta love it :-) Thanks for your other post/reply too - I will be getting back to you on that one Conor "Sitaram Chamarty" wrote in message news:slrnglf3qh.c7j.sitaramc@sitaramc.homelinux.net... > On 2008-12-28, Zorba wrote: >> Under "Examining an old version without creating a new branch" subsection >> in >> chapter1 >> >> to aid my understanding, could the statement: >> >> "The HEAD then refers to the SHA1 of the commit instead of to a branch, >> and >> git branch shows that you are no longer on a branch:" >> >> be restated more explicitly as: >> >> "The HEAD then refers to the SHA1 of the commit instead of to a branch >> head, >> and git branch shows that you are no longer on a branch head:" > > Sure, but I prefer "tip"; reduces confusion between "head" > and "HEAD" in spoken descriptions (I teach internal classes > on git occasionally, once even on a conf call!) > > The git glossary makes no mention of "tip", so this is > probably "unblessed" :-) >