From: David Symonds <dsymonds@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 03:03:12 GMT
Subject: Re: A couple branch questions
Message-ID: <ee77f5c20802131903i45b1629fpcb4a5c6e4f483052@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <18355.42595.377377.433309@lisa.zopyra.com>

On Feb 13, 2008 6:24 PM, Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, February 13, 2008 at 17:45:16 (-0800) David Symonds writes:
> >On Feb 13, 2008 5:39 PM, Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 1) git-branch -d <branchname> complains if <branchname> hasn't been
> >> merged to HEAD. Shouldn't it really only complain if <branchname>
> >> hasn't been merged into any local branch? i.e., as long as
> >> <branchname> has been merged, why care to which branch?
> >
> >It's easy to mistype branch names, and you typically only delete them
> >after you merge them into your current branch. If you're really sure,
> >just pass -D instead of -d.
>
> How does that answer the question posed?

If I have four branches, a, b1, b2 and c, and I've merged b2 into c
(but planning to keep developing on b2), and just merged b1 into a
(which I have checked out), then I probably only want to delete b1,
not b2. The "current" branch is a useful notion because it
significantly simplifies merging/rebasing operations.


Dave.