On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:29 AM Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 2:01 PM Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> >
> > v3 sees switch-branch go back to switch-branch (in v2 it was
> > checkout-branch). checkout-files is also renamed restore-files (v1 was
> > restore-paths). Hopefully we won't see another rename.
>
> I started reading through the patches.  I also tried to apply them
> locally, but they had conflicts or missing base file version on both
> master and next.  What version did you base it on?

I think nd/checkout-dwim-fix because of a non-trivial conflict there
(but I don't remember when I noticed it and rebased on that). Anyway
you can get the whole series at

https://gitlab.com/pclouds/git/tree/switch-branch-and-checkout-files

It fixes some of your comments already, a couple of bug fixes here and
there and in a good-enough shape that I start actually using it.

> > - Two more fancy features (the "git checkout --index" being the
> >   default mode and the backup log for accidental overwrites) are of
> >   course still missing. But they are coming.
> >
> > I did not go replace "detached HEAD" with "unnamed branch" (or "no
> > branch") everywhere because I think a unique term is still good to
> > refer to this concept. Or maybe "no branch" is good enough. I dunno.
>
> I personally like "unnamed branch", but "no branch" would still be
> better than "detached HEAD".

Haven't really worked on killing the term "detached HEAD" yet. But I
noticed the other day that git-branch reports

* (HEAD detached from 703266f6e4)

and I didn't know how to rephrase that. I guess "unnamed branch from
703266f6e4" is probably good enough but my old-timer brain screams no.
-- 
Duy

Reply via email to