On Sun, 18 Mar 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:This is indeed a corner case. And it was never considered before as great care was made at the time to be sure pushes wouldn't create any reflogs on the remote side, which is effectively done by not automatically enabling reflogs on bare repos. If the meaning of HEAD changed (although indirectly) because HEAD happens to point to the branch that just got updated then logically the HEAD reflog should be updated too. On the other hand the HEAD reflog should reflect operations performed on HEAD. Since the push updates the branch directly it is not exactly performing some operation on HEAD since HEAD could point anywhere and that wouldn't change the push at all. Meaning that for the discussion of pushing to a non-bare repository with a dirty working tree... If the branch being pushed into is not pointed to by HEAD then no consideration what so ever about the working tree should be made, and no update to the HEAD reflog made of course. Nicolas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| H. Peter Anvin | Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.27-rc5 |
| Ingo Molnar | [announce] "kill the Big Kernel Lock (BKL)" tree |
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Ben Hutchings | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH iproute2] Re: HTB accuracy for high speed |
