From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Obscure error/warning/information message from git pull Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:40:51 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <87egt0ic7g.fsf@fencepost.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> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416336122 8175 80.91.229.3 (18 Nov 2014 18:42:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 18:42:02 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 18 19:41:55 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 1Xqnis-0007oX-ED for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:41:54 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54778 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xqnis-00030m-1J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:41:54 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57281) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XqniE-0002VJ-5j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:41:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xqni5-0000Rz-Ut for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:41:14 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:33968) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xqni5-0000Pq-Ok for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:41:05 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xqni4-0007VD-4z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:41:04 +0100 Original-Received: from x2f46629.dyn.telefonica.de ([2.244.102.41]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:41:04 +0100 Original-Received: from dak by x2f46629.dyn.telefonica.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:41:04 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 21 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: x2f46629.dyn.telefonica.de X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:hUrtaVxhtpXgfc0GbF9FZKJujzA= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 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:177630 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > 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. A local branch is slightly more than its tip: you can be "on" a branch, and if you commit then, the tip is advanced. In contrast, a remote-mirroring branch is indeed not more than its tip: checking it out gives you a detached HEAD. Committing does not change the branch tip. Being "on" a branch also implies some defaults for actions like pushing, pulling, rebasing, merging, committing. But this "extra branchiness" only applies to branch heads. Indeed, if you write master^0 instead of master, the branchiness is already gone: master^0 is not associated with the master branch specially in any way. It's just the same as a naked commit id. -- David Kastrup