From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Obscure error/warning/information message from git pull Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:18:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83bno49xtw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20141114120604.GA3859@acm.acm> <87389mkjwo.fsf@thinkpad-t440p.tsdh.org> <20141114141434.GM3565@embecosm.com> <20141114180521.GA3168@acm.acm> <20141114230235.GF3168@acm.acm> <20141117141123.GA4294@acm.acm> <83lhn89zxn.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416334757 16438 80.91.229.3 (18 Nov 2014 18:19:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 18:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sergey Organov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 18 19:19:07 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XqnMp-0006Nf-Gx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:19:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54673 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqnMp-0002ZY-3C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:19:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50535) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqnMX-0002ZJ-O1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:18:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqnMR-0000t2-HH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:18:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:35627) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqnMR-0000sk-9B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:18:43 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NF800500YJYXM00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:18:41 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NF8005NBYV5XA10@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:18:41 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177621 Archived-At: > From: Sergey Organov > Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 20:58:15 +0300 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> From: Sergey Organov > >> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:59:51 +0300 > >> > >> My point is that once you send "branch" to a Git command > > > > You don't send a branch to Git commands, you send the branch's > > _label_, or _name_. Let's distinguish between the thing and its name, > > okay? > > Yes, you send a _name_. It does not represent "branch" the "active line > of development" though. It just points to particular commit. So a branch's name can serve more than one duty, so what? > >> Git itself has no "branches" that are "active lines of development" > >> in its data model. > > > > Git might not have it, but we its users do. > > You are welcome to have them. In your mind. This won't help you to > understand Git better. It's orthogonal to understanding Git. > It's the latter that I've tried to help to achieve. Sorry if I > failed. You cannot help people understand new tools if you start by telling them to forget everything they've learned. You should instead build on what they know, or think they know, gradually replacing that with new knowledge. Regardless, the concept of "branch" as a separate line of development is not killed by Git. It's just that a branch can be named by its tip, and vice versa. > My point is that branch name doesn't represent anything else but > particular reference to particular commit in Git. No, it also represents all the previous commits made on that branch that are reachable through first-parents. > >> Please notice no "branch" in the description of the "--source" > > > > I'd suggest not to treat Git docs as a kind of "holy scripture" whose > > exact wording has any magic meaning beyond what meets the eye. Don't > > look for some deep meaning in the words used there, because more often > > than not there isn't any. > > The description in the docs is very exact. Sorry you don't see it, that > means I'm not very good at explaining it indeed. It's not your fault. It's the fault of those who wrote that. Sometimes being "exact" means being useless.