On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 12:09 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > You said that "checkout" does not do a necessary check that is done > in "branch", so presumably "branch" already has a code to do so that > is not called by the current "checkout", right? Then you would add > a new caller in "checkout" to trigger the same check that is already > done in "branch", but the code "branch" uses _might_ be too specific > to the kind of data the current implementation of "branch" uses and > it _may_ not be easy to call it directly from "checkout" (I didn't > check if that is the case). If so, then the check implemented in > the current "branch" may need to be refactored before it can easily > be called from the new caller you would be adding to "checkout". > > Thanks. Now I get it. What about doing that check in branch.c::create_branch or branch.c::validate_new_branchname? I guess creating a branch named HEAD isn't that good an idea in any case. Doing the check there might prevent a similar situation in future, I guess. Further "branch" and "checkout" do call branch.c::create_branch which in turn calls branch.c::validate_new_branchname.
-- Kaartic
