Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] clone: print advice on checking out detached HEAD

From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 10, 2012, 05:54 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8D=eVfhZOC3m3H50WZxa_Ep_UVYD_ZaEVj8H1C1z7+PRQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vlipgb1r1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 2012/1/10 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>> This patch makes 100% sense _if_ we let clone result in a repository with
>>> a detached HEAD, which I am not sure if it is a good idea, or if it is
>>> better to fail the attempt to clone to give incentive to the owner of the
>>> remote repository to fix it.
>>
>> Then a hostile remote can stop users from cloning his repository by
>> detaching HEAD? That's not nice.
>
> That's crazy talk. Why does anybody from a hostile remote to begin with?

The point is, why punish client for remote's problems? If I have to talk to upstream and wait for them to fix their repository, I might as well give up cloning and move on. It's OK to annoy users to the point that they ask upstream for a fix, but we should not disallow clone in that case.

-- 
Duy