From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: perryh@pluto•rain.com (Perry Hutchison)
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: resolving a (possibly remote) branch HEAD to a hash
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 11:41:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq614nugt2.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55c5aa2a.sK/tpvXyORYGVq0d%perryh@pluto.rain.com> (Perry Hutchison's message of "Sat, 08 Aug 2015 00:05:14 -0700")
perryh@pluto•rain.com (Perry Hutchison) writes:
>> ... we do not say "append 'refs/remotes/<anything>/' for various
>> values of <anything> and see if such a ref exists" when resolving
>> an abbreviated refname 'master'.
>
> checkout appears to.
You are referring to this part of the documentation:
If <branch> is not found but there does exist a tracking branch in
exactly one remote (call it <remote>) with a matching name, treat as
equivalent to
$ git checkout -b <branch> --track <remote>/<branch>
A reader needs to read this part of the documentation a bit more
carefully in order to notice that it never says it is equivalent to:
$ git checkout -b <branch> -t <branch> ;# NOT CORRECT
This behaviour was brought in by somebody who thought that, in the
context of "checkout" (and only in that context), it is clear that
missing <branch> that can only mean the sole <remote>/<branch> and
make that signal something more than what the user told "checkout"
to do: "If you want to check out a <branch>, and it does not exist
yet, you must wanted to create your own <branch> and start it at the
same commit as somebody else has at the tip of his <branch>".
This "clever" dwim is very specific to the way you interact with
"checkout" and generally does not apply when you want to run
anything other than "checkout", e.g. "rev-parse" or "log".
But it is _so_ convenient a short-cut, that it lets new people form
into an illusion that <branch> could be naming <remote>/<branch>.
That is an incorrect perception.
The rationale behind "signal something more" above goes like this:
if the user wanted to detach the head at the same commit as somebody
else's <branch>, she would explicitly have written
$ git checkout <remote>/<branch>
to do so. Because <remote>/<branch> is the shortest valid way to
name that remote-tracking branch (i.e. exactly because <branch> is
not a valid abbreviation for <remote>/<branch>), we can treat
$ git checkout <branch>
when <branch> is not a local branch name specially.
It is sad and ironic that this checkout-specific DWIM works only
because <branch> does not mean <remote>/<branch>, but presence of
the DWIM gives a wrong illusion that it does X-<.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-10 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-07 9:16 resolving a (possibly remote) branch HEAD to a hash Perry Hutchison
2015-08-07 17:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-08-08 7:05 ` Perry Hutchison
2015-08-10 18:41 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq614nugt2.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=perryh@pluto$(echo .)rain.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox