From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ron Garret Subject: Re: master^ is not a local branch -- huh?!? Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 14:52:08 -0800 Organization: Amalgamated Widgets Message-ID: References: <31a97741002010352x1ad27f26ia4d51857bb2d2d4f@mail.gmail.com> <7vpr4o3lg9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <87aavsu9b3.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 01 23:52:38 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 1Nc58H-0006ny-I7 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:52:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754640Ab0BAWwc (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:52:32 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:42025 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752728Ab0BAWwb (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:52:31 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nc589-0006kB-0a for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:52:29 +0100 Received: from 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com ([68.190.211.184]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:52:29 +0100 Received: from ron1 by 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:52:29 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.1 (Intel Mac OS X) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: In article <87aavsu9b3.fsf@osv.gnss.ru>, Sergei Organov wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > Steve Diver writes: > > [...] > > > If read carefully (some may argue that it does not need a very careful > > reading to get it, though), this hints that "detached HEAD" state is a > > substitute for using a temporary branch, but it may not be strong > > enough. > > For my rather fresh eye it looks more like unnamed (anonymous?) branch > than a temporary one. Doesn't detached HEAD behave exactly like a > regular HEAD but pointing to the tip of an unnamed branch? I strongly concur with this. And as long as I'm weighing in, it would also help to prevent confusion if it were made clear that this unnamed branch doesn't actually come into existence unless and until you do a commit. rg