Re: git push to a non-bare repository

> On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 12:08:47AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > If the meaning of HEAD changed (although indirectly) because HEAD 
> > happens to point to the branch that just got updated then logically the 
> > HEAD reflog should be updated too.  On the other hand the HEAD reflog 
> > should reflect operations performed on HEAD.  Since the push updates the 
> > branch directly it is not exactly performing some operation on HEAD 
> > since HEAD could point anywhere and that wouldn't change the push at 
> > all.
> > 
> > Meaning that for the discussion of pushing to a non-bare repository with 
> > a dirty working tree... If the branch being pushed into is not pointed 
> > to by HEAD then no consideration what so ever about the working tree 
> > should be made, and no update to the HEAD reflog made of course.
> 
> Right, but if the branch being pointed to is pointed to by HEAD I
> would argue that the reflog for HEAD should be updated, since
> operations that reference HEAD will see a new commit, and and it will
> be confusing when "git reflog" shows no hint of the change.
> 
> Of couse, if the branch being pushed to isn't one which is pointed by
> HEAD, of course HEAD's reflog shouldn't be updated.