Re: Working copy revision and push pain

From: Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org>
Date: Mar 23, 2008, 13:54 UTC
Message-ID: <47E6612A.5020408@jwatt.org>
In-Reply-To: <51419b2c0803230645l5b07bbf5h9cbf9b6f47373efa@mail.gmail.com>

Elijah Newren wrote:

Show 26 quoted lines

> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Jonathan Watt <jwatt@jwatt.org> wrote:
>> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>  > Hi,
>>  >
>>  > On Sun, 23 Mar 2008, Jonathan Watt wrote:
>>  >
>>  >> There seems to be a problem with git-push when the working copy of the
>>  >> directory being pushed to came from the magic revision HEAD, but not
>>  >> when the working copy came from some other revision.
>>  >
>>  > http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitFaq#head-b96f48bc9c925074be9f95c0fce69bcece5f6e73
>>  >
>>  > Sidenote: I am constantly amazed how people have no problem accepting that
>>  > a CVS-Server has no working directory, but all of a sudden think that a
>>  > Git-server should have one, and auto-update it.
>>
>>  Hi Dscho. I think you've misread my email. (Or not read it. ;-)) I do not expect
>>  git-push to update the working copy of the repository being pushed to. In fact
>>  my complaint would be more that it *does* appear to modify the working copy
>>  (well, not so much modify the working copy as get confused about which revision
>>  the working copy came from) when the working copy came from HEAD.
> 
> Ah, I hadn't thought of it that way before.  I think you are
> suggesting that pushing to the active branch of a repository with an
> associated working copy should cause the HEAD to become detached.  Is
> that right?

To be honest, I'm not sure what you mean by "HEAD to become detached". If you mean that the git-push should, if necessary, stop associating the working copy with HEAD if it's going to change HEAD, then absolutely. It wasn't the same solution as I was thinking of (stop associating the working copy with HEAD and instead associate it with the sha1 HEAD currently points to), but I guess it's the same result. :-)

Jonathan