From: Jon Loeliger <jdl@jdl.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 13:44:33 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Add a few more words to the glossary.
Message-ID: <E1Fbe89-0006W5-JT@jdl.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vu0868h7a.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

So, like, the other day Junio C Hamano mumbled:
> Jon Loeliger <jdl@jdl.com> writes:
> 
> >  ref::
> > -	A 40-byte hex representation of a SHA1 pointing to a particular
> > -	object. These may be stored in `$GIT_DIR/refs/`.
> > +	A 40-byte hex representation of a SHA1 or a name that denotes
> > +	a particular object. These may be stored in `$GIT_DIR/refs/`.
> >  
 
> Uum.  Not very clear.  Do we use that word that often?

Well, I was mystified a bit too, and I tried to clean it up some...
"ref" gets used as half a <refspec>, from pull-fetch-param.txt:

	A parameter <ref> without a colon is equivalent to <ref>: when
	pulling/fetching, so it merges <ref> into the current branch
	without storing the remote branch anywhere locally

So maybe I was confused here.

> > +symbolic ref::
> > +	See "ref".
>
> I think I used that term to differenciate between HEAD symlink
> pointing at refs/heads/master and HEAD being a regular file that
> stores a line "ref: refs/heads/master\n"; the latter is the
> modern style "textual symref", so in that context it is not
> about 40-byte hex at all.  And at that level it is really a
> jargon to talk about one small implementation detail of HEAD, so
> I am not sure it deserves to be in the glossary.

Given "git-symbolic-ref <name> [<ref>]", clearly I just botched it.
You were right to drop my confused "symbolic ref" entry. :-(

> >  tracking branch::
> > -	A regular git branch that is used to follow changes from
> > +	A regular git branch that is used to follow changes frompointing
> >  	another repository.  A tracking branch should not contain
> 
> I think this is a typo?

Yes.  Thanks for noticing and cleaning.

jdl