On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> If you are arguing in favor of arbitrary symbolic refs plus @{u} to
>> work, a patch that allows that, and nothing else, should make sense.
>> Such patch would trigger further discussion, for example, if
>> get_branch() is the right place to achieve that.
>
> What kind of absurd argument is this? I am trying to solve the @ ->
> HEAD problem correctly. In the process, I fixed general symbolic-ref
> handling and cleaned up the @-parsing logic. Does anyone have a
> problem with the fix, or am I missing something?
This is not a fix, this is multiple changes blobbed into one.
> So, start the discussion. What are you waiting for?
>
>> I still see this in the code:
>>
>> if (!name || !*name || !strcmp(name, "HEAD"))
>
> Remove the !strcmp(name, "HEAD") and tell me what you see. "HEAD"
> will get resolved just like any other symbolic ref, via the hunk I
> added.
If you are so certain why don't you remove that code then? I wouldn't
be so sure.
--
Felipe Contreras
--
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
