From: Junio C Hamano Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 20:25:24 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] logging branch deletion to help recovering from mistakes Message-ID: <7vfwu9pbyj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20101207180236.GC21483@burratino> Jonathan Nieder writes: > Casey Dahlin wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 11:45:20AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >>> Casey Dahlin wrote: > >>>> Could commits made onto a detached head also show up here? Or is that >>>> better thwarted with another mechanism? >>> >>> I think that's better thwarted with the HEAD reflog: >>> >>> $ git log -g HEAD >> >> I was more worried about changes that were made onto a detached head, >> and then the head was reattached, leaving the new commits dangling. > > But isn't that exactly what a detached HEAD is for? If one wants > the experiments one does on detached HEAD to be kept around "just > in case", wouldn't it make more sense to give them a (branch) name so > they can be separated from one another? What are you arguing after giving a correct answer. "git log -g HEAD" keeps track of what was at the tip of HEAD, be it pointing at a branch or pointing diretly at a commit in a detached state, no?