Re: [PATCH] Proof-of-concept patch to remember what the detached HEAD was
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
- Date
- Oct 15, 2009, 19:07 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.2.00.0910151504510.20122@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LNX.2.00.0910151054190.32515@iabervon.org>
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
> I think the description used in CVS and SVN (and, I think, others) is that > you're not at the HEAD revision. I think they both account for the state > where you've checked out the revision by number that's the latest > revision, but you still can't grow the branch because you can't > simultaneously stay on r1000 (as requested explicitly) and add a new > commit. > > So maybe the right explanation is: > > $ git checkout master; git branch > * master > $ git checkout origin/master; git branch > * origin/master (not at head) > $ git checkout 123cafe^5; git branch > * 123cafe^5 (not at head)
I think this is wrong. Git has multiple heads, and insisting on "not at head" would be extremely confusing.
Nicolas