From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:07:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Proof-of-concept patch to remember what the detached HEAD was
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:

> 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