Re: git branch documentation improvements
- From
Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
- Date
- May 10, 2010, 06:22 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4BE7A629.7050709@viscovery.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <201005081839.37790.ahartmetz@gmail.com>
Am 5/8/2010 18:39, schrieb Andreas Hartmetz:
Show 7 quoted lines
> On Friday 07 May 2010 09:20:15 Johannes Sixt wrote: >> 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).
Huh? The purpose of -f is not to *move* a branch head, but to say "trust me, I know what I'm doing". Why would "start-point" not be suitable in this case?
-- Hannes