From: Andy Parkins Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 17:54:17 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] prevent HEAD reflog to be interpreted as current branch reflog Message-ID: <200702031754.19494.andyparkins@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On Saturday 2007, February 03 17:07, Mark Wooding wrote: > And what do you do when HEAD is detached? Well; my proposal was that when head is detached HEAD@{} would return the "unnamed branch" reflog. However, that idea has been rejected (which I'm fine with). > I mean: I detach HEAD, and then ask about HEAD@{yesterday}. It'd be > nonsensical for that to be an error, since HEAD surely did have a > value yesterday. But it can't tell me where my current branch head > was yesterday, because there isn't a current branch to tell me about. > > HEAD@{date} referring to the HEAD reflog is the only sane thing to > do. Well I don't think "only sane thing" is entirely accurate; I'm happy to accept counter arguments, but rhetoric doesn't count. My (abandoned) suggestion was that HEAD@{..} on a undetached head would be equal to @{..} HEAD@{..} on a detached head would be equal to unnamed-branch@{..} @{..} would be equal to @{...} I accept (but not necessarily condone) that the counter proposal is also valid. My argument is about which is the more consistent. It would appear to be a judgment call; so I'm happy to bow out. I don't think calling me insane (by proxy) lends any weight to any argument. Andy -- Dr Andrew Parkins, M Eng (Hons), AMIEE andyparkins@gmail.com