From: Andreas Hartmetz <ahartmetz@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 08 May 2010 16:39:37 GMT
Subject: Re: git branch documentation improvements
Message-ID: <201005081839.37790.ahartmetz@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BE3BF2F.8050903@viscovery.net>

On Friday 07 May 2010 09:20:15 Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 5/7/2010 0:24, schrieb Andreas Hartmetz:
> > The most significant change is renaming <start-point> (or is it
> > <startpoint>...) to <branch-head> because even I as a relative beginner
> > know that a branch is defined by its (movable) head, and <start-point>
> > *does* actually specify the new branch head if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> But what is wrong with "start-point"? It precisely conveys the meaning of
> the parameter.
> 
Look at -f: as far as I understand it moves the branch *head*, so start-point 
is plain wrong. The "root" of the branch is not moved, or only moved 
indirectly (not sure if the latter is allowed).