Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org writes: > >> However, in this case, even running the fetch was a mistake; I would >> have prefered that it leave FETCH_HEAD in its previous state. > > I think the clearing of leftover FETCH_HEAD is one of the early > things "git fetch" does, unless "--append" is in effect. I haven't > looked at the code for a long time, but it may be possible to move > the logic of doing so around so that this clearing is done as lazily > as possible. > > I however suspect that such a change may have fallouts on other > people who are writing tools like yours; they may be depending on > seeing FETCH_HEAD cleared after a failed fetch, and be surprised to > see a stale contents after they (attempt to) run "git fetch" in it. > > So it is not so clear if it is a good thing to change the behaviour > of "git fetch" not to touch FETCH_HEAD upon a failure.
Ok; backwards compatibility is important. Perhaps FETCH_HEAD could be copied to FETCH_HEAD_prev or some such, to allow recovering in an error case? -- -- Stephe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
