Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2017, #03; Fri, 15)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 22, 2017, 00:59 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqpoajmtu4.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALiud+m1PAD8r0ygoUj3g4LzQjdoPu0CmjiejyG8pHOhr3Fk=Q@mail.gmail.com>

Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> writes:

Show 17 quoted lines

>>
>> * sd/branch-copy (2017-06-18) 3 commits
>>  - branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m)
>>  - branch: add test for -m renaming multiple config sections
>>  - config: create a function to format section headers
>>
>>  "git branch" learned "-c/-C" to create and switch to a new branch
>>  by copying an existing one.
>>
>>  I personally do not think "branch --copy master backup" while on
>>  "master" that switches to "backup" is a good UI, and I *will* say
>>  "I told you so" when users complain after we merge this down to
>>  'master'.
>
> Junio, what's up with this one? It's been a long time for this being
> cooked in next. Do we have a plan/idea going forward or is it just
> waiting for more feedback?

Thanks for pinging.

I was (in a strange way) hoping that it was just me who felt that a "copy" operation of the current branch that moves me to a new branch is a design mistake, and I was planning to start merging this down to 'next' based on that assumption, but IIRC it turned out that it wasn't just me. During the renewed discussion I somehow got an impression that the concensus was for "copy" to just copy without ever changing what HEAD says, and if an operation that switches to a new branch based on the current branch is needed, the right place to do so is to enhance/extend "checkout -b".

My understanding of the next step was for those who are interested in moving this topic forward to update these patches in that direction.