PUSH_HEAD, was Re: FETCH_HEAD question

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> >> Unless dwim_ref() is updated to handle FETCH_HEAD specially, and
> >> return not the first SHA1, but the one not marked "not-for-merge".
> >> Then the UI would at least be consistent, but this would not be
> >> backward compatible.
> >
> > You cannot fix parsing FETCH_HEAD as a ref (and neither will you be able
> > to do with PUSH_HEAD), as it can contain _more_ than one SHA-1s.  This
> > still holds true when ignoring the not-for-merge lines, as an octopus is
> > a quite real possibility.
> 
> An even better argument against than it not being backward compatible. :-)
> 
> And there is no PUSH_HEAD.