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: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 05:43:37 +0200 Message-ID: <83tx1v97o6.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> <83bno49xtw.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416368650 16011 80.91.229.3 (19 Nov 2014 03:44:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 03:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sergey Organov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 19 04:44:03 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 1XqwBT-0001vk-68 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 04:43:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56364 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqwBS-00013Y-Fo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:43:58 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55115) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqwBJ-00012b-Rl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:43:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqwBD-0000km-QE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:43:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:51513) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqwBD-0000ki-IU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:43:43 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NF900A00ONGTE00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 05:43:42 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NF900AOPP0TU100@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Wed, 19 Nov 2014 05:43:42 +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:177707 Archived-At: > From: Sergey Organov > Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:57:34 +0300 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> 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. > > Sorry, but I really think that to better understand Git, one should > forget, at least temporarily, some things she learned from other VCSes. Then we will have to agree to disagree. > >> 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. > > Well, given the following history (time goes from left to right): > > - C - D <- foo > / > ... - A - B > \ > - E - F <- bar > > > what branch commit A was made on, 'foo' or 'bar'? Depends on when each one of the branches was created, of course. > You see, you should have had no "made on that branch" in your > description, provided you describe Gits' idea of a branch, not your one, > as Git does not remember on what branch commit was made. But that's the whole point of our disagreement: I'm talking about what human users mean when they say "branch", while you keep talking about what Git means. When you try to explain to a human something that involves branches, you had better did it in human terms, not program implementation terms. AKA "concept" vs "implementation".