From: Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:52:03 GMT
Subject: Re: In favor of "git commit --no-parent"
Message-ID: <CAMOZ1Bu7UGOu=XPUbjWo30hzGfgHSk4dsZRUsDT4cUmwu79GbA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vmxdnte0j.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 18:11, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> That leaves "Hidden History" the only useful use case. IOW, the answer to
> the first question above is not "Separate or Hidden History", but is
> "Hidden History and nothing else".
>
> And a half of the the answer to the second question is "checkout --orphan"
> (and the other half would be "filter-branch").

Uh... no.

If you think that "Hidden History" is all that matters, then you think that

  git commit --no-parent

is all that matters.

That's what my email was showing.

> "checkout --orphan" does
> have major safety advantage than introducing "commit --no-parent", as Peff
> pointed out earlier (to which I agreed).

Did I not provide in my previous email a decent safety mechanism?