Re: Expected Behavior?
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Nov 9, 2005, 05:50 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vmzkenzcx.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20051108225320.GB4805@c165.ib.student.liu.se>
Fredrik Kuivinen <freku045@student.liu.se> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
>> Oops, I missed that part. This is unsafe in theory, if you >> could overwrite existing file3_master or file3_dev. Does that >> matter in practice? > > It wont overwrite any existing files. If there is a file named > 'file3_master' then the new file will be named 'file3_master_1' and if > that file also exists the new file will be named 'file3_master_2', and > so on.
Another thing to watch out is that a branch name could have a slash in it. It might make more sense to just name the heads file3~2 or file3~3 (with as many ~s repeated to avoid name clashes) like Pasky does.