Junio C Hamano wrote: > Although from the consistency point of view, HEAD reflog to > follow swicthing branches like Nico's patch aims for (but not > implements fully yet) makes perfect sense, I still am somewhat > doubtful about it being actually useful in practice. I think that's quite useful. > Even if we > assume it is useful, I think forbidding people from saying > HEAD@{...} right now only because the new semantics is > unimplemented yet feels wrong. If you use only one branch, > there is no difference between the reflog of master and HEAD > today, without waiting for that "reflog on HEAD". I don't know how people are used to type HEAD@{..}, but why not: 1. have .@{..} or @@{..} for "the current branch i am on" and have HEAD@{..} behave like nicolas is aiming to do. 2. have HEAD@{..} to mean "the current branch i am on" and invent something else for "HEAD commit". doesn't sound too logic, though. ignore me if i'm sounding stupid :) cheers simon -- Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\ Work - Mac +++ space for low €€€ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ / Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \ Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-02-02 08:48:03 EST