On Tue, 2017-09-12 at 15:49 +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91...@gmail.com> writes: > > > 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. > > The above analysis sounds sensible, so it appears that you already > found a function that is shared in the two codepaths, and have a > good plan to make them consistent? >
Yes, I was just waiting for this reply. In the mean time I thought of sending a patch for this but was procrastinating as I felt a little lazy. > I was sweeping my mailbox to collect loose ends that haven't been > tied down, and noticed that this topic does not seem to reach a > conclusion. Do we want to reboot the effort? Or should we just > throw it in the #leftoverbits bin for now? > Don't worry I'll send a patch for this, soon. I mean it :) -- Kaartic
