From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.145]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EF8F31E0EA for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 16:10:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.145 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756829429; cv=none; b=OQ1z8WZzYmC/DUAnjMKi04eWNEMXRFnRLAPeDiyNfqKDxAaqAhgHSpIKPF3b+yY2C7G23BmxkwAxji7fKCXNwIlgsCn3tgAetVNvIf3rP+NZyqWaMRWAaNuk9ciecEOPsVwDLWFQen34NdkXr+Vj6H8o8qo8wcygUjP8DMnFaZw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756829429; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TtiXbTFHKUpTk9VQnpaE2GrpoyNcDnqQ5ZKV+5yg8ug=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tRleD9v1NPsOLxYxocKCgI1kTmP1QNKALhYt37pJQacajTddS7s4uZsY5UD7U6D5po26IDyJ6uILmTo/i4cL1ATtaXi9kjsESfG60l0A99Iue1dZFcI+4Dt9m+3TJd+hGYcbsOIx/pa9zoXVo2yvC9aAqizR8AEsn+0gikX/LTY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=3g1RCWuG; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=On4r//j8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.145 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="3g1RCWuG"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="On4r//j8" Received: from phl-compute-05.internal (phl-compute-05.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827EEEC0502; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 12:10:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-05.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 02 Sep 2025 12:10:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1756829426; x=1756915826; bh=8LD9/vZ63H IrSaUWTBHQEEpV+BwQZzm5BWJ0iZjHfK4=; b=3g1RCWuGZ2dJzXLBIlN5VXDjkJ NP/5ycwKnT0yyprVrHCffSEBSUwjP0wvgXX1u6Hv0fPG2dlu/dwmmGocAwkW7y/W ZLnjMQksqq9zGYauzt6QlmqNrfWd0kUUDr2VJIiRR6atg/SjJZTCoiCtjWB7oeaA dllu+h8RyoG9E2zqjBUI1mpWV59J9HfMpEryaR7XRaxGlmM/AjSNrxBATcKPwzzO k5gMyTr39A6M0ZU2pk5ktgO8dj2nBs2TuyK9q7GMEdBQ3ojmX9FVs08BHAjaWlul JSXsunlDsaJqluT7U4PQMOk4sssE+5PmzPs7k80l3HU3YPZaLzMahpsGaFTg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1756829426; x=1756915826; bh=8LD9/vZ63HIrSaUWTBHQEEpV+BwQZzm5BWJ 0iZjHfK4=; b=On4r//j8BzjfDP7EvJ0OFYEu2ANVwudN1Y5TnAIFVV1Wy+JWnzp xMvEaUyaFloca4Fm3LuFOVRxN3hG8gHLzRLm8nMilY92vdwr40PXLIKXua9ERb/4 cnb/wNFqk+xkpXsoPm1m4+nHlD4nDz6hJbQF0cHR/h6zEf1R0azLmyfDcdOq24EP cre1CUZ2/QeQFbNW/p8AijiGPdv1ZfDrH1P+a8/cbF0W5YaptfoPXGE3CbBoDgL9 Wvt51ukFBPdL0jATChnIrJCFvN++cV1oUGUNktdzMaJP5K2WCO4JCP7khGRE1LsC Hb2uG3nXi3lwTW2aWO4D/2IMrm3sO1PCr/Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdejudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhl ohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpe fhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucevucfj rghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrh hnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieegieen ucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgihhtsh htvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeehpdhmohguvgepshhmthhp ohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehjuhhlihgrsehjvhhnshdrtggrpdhrtghpthhtohepghhith hgihhtghgrughgvghtsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghr rdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegsvghnrdhknhhosghlvgesghhmrghilh drtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 2 Sep 2025 12:10:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Julia Evans" Cc: "Julia Evans" , git@vger.kernel.org, "D. Ben Knoble" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] doc: git-checkout: don't use "reset" In-Reply-To: <9d708558-df36-4bdd-a914-522228b27215@app.fastmail.com> (Julia Evans's message of "Mon, 01 Sep 2025 10:28:44 -0400") References: <360051d2a656727ca42d489de81ffec9b23a6386.1756467934.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <9d708558-df36-4bdd-a914-522228b27215@app.fastmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2025 09:10:24 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Julia Evans" writes: > I'm surprised to hear you say that "reset" is one of the most often > used Git commands -- what I frequently hear from Git users is that they > use `git reset` only in "emergencies" where something has gone wrong > and that they're afraid of using it. For the list of commands that have been historically considered "common": $ git -h is meant to serve a good guide. We may want to cull/update some entries (like, "backfill" which should not be more prominent than "maintenance", for example), but I think it is not far off or way too stale (for one thing, it no longer lists checkout but gives two separate commands, restore and switch, which are no longer marked as experimental). >>> `git checkout --detach []`:: >>> `git checkout [--detach] `:: >> >> This is in response to "transactional equivalent". I've always felt >> that there is no need to say "transactional" in this at all. IOW, I >> wouldn't have minded if we rewrote this more heavily. > > "Transactional equivalent" was bothering me too and I like the > idea of rewriting it, will give it a shot. Thanks.