Re: Question about 'branch -d' safety

From: Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
Date: Jul 11, 2010, 08:48 UTC
Message-ID: <7414fff60758b3f60d69a1bbed49165e@212.159.54.234>
In-Reply-To: <201007110916.29567.jnareb@gmail.com>

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 09:16:26 +0200, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Dnia niedziela 11. lipca 2010 08:55, Clemens Buchacher napisał:
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 02:57:35PM -0700, Jakub Narebski wrote:
>> > 
>> > It's unfortunately not so easy.  The problem you have to solve is D/F
>> > conflict: if you have 'foo/bar' branch, you can't create 'foo'

branch,

Show 14 quoted lines

>> > but after deleting 'foo/bar' you want to be able to create 'foo'
>> > branch and reflog for 'foo' branch.
>> 
>> I'm going to read up on Jonathan's pointers. But I do not really
>> see the problem above. If the reflog already exists, the new branch
>> simpliy continues using it. So if the branch is re-created, it's as
>> if the branch had never been deleted.
> 
> The problem is, that when you have 'foo/bar' branch, then you have
> 'foo/bar' reflog.  When you delete branch 'foo/bar', but do not delete
> 'foo/bar' reflog (only add to it branch deletion event), and then you
> want to create 'foo' branch, git wouldn't be able to create reflog
> fo 'foo' because of directory / file (D/F) conflict: there is 'foo/'
> directory preventing file 'foo' from being created.

You could just change the reflog code so that if foo is a directory it looks for/creates foo/.reflog (the dot is to prevent a clash with a valid branch name)?

>> Or possibly we add a special reflog entry which points the branch
>> to a zero sha to signify that the branch had been deleted.
> 
> That is a good idea anyway.

-- 
Julian