Re: [PATCH] Proof-of-concept patch to remember what the detached HEAD was
- From
Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
- Date
- Oct 16, 2009, 19:48 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LNX.2.00.0910162029460.31673@reaper.quantumfyre.co.uk>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vvdiftb0d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk> writes:
>
>>> And such uncommitted changes would be lost in the big "undo the fetch
>>> update" diff. So you'd have to do:
>>> git reset --soft HEAD@{1}
>>> git checkout --merge HEAD@{1}
>>>
>>> to keep them, while updating to the new state of the remote tracking
>>> branch. Not quite intuitive, is it?
>>
>> I don't care what git has to do, I'm talking about the user experience
>
> But Bj?rn is showing two commands the _user_ has to type, iow, the comment
> is about the user experience.Only Currently. My point was that _if_ we wanted to support this sort of thing, then we can make is simpler to do by providing a simple command for the user.
The point I wanted to make was that the decision on what to do should be driven by the user's experience - not by the fact that it is easier to implement something else.
My interest in this thread is solely that it might provide a mechanism to find out which tag was checked out. So, I'm just chucking in my $0.02 as a user. My suggestions are probably complete rubbish, as I haven't really had time to think them through... Sorry.
-- Julian --- Look, just gimme some inner peace, or I'll mop the floor with ya! -- Homer Simpson El Viaje Misterioso de Nuestro Homer