On Dec 10, 9:48 pm, Rick DeNatale <rick.denat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > The idea is that the "HEAD" is a distinguished reference, which is
> > used to point to the commit object on which the work tree is based,
> > and it has no inherent relation to the notion of the "current branch".
>
> Actually .git/HEAD is exactly where git stores the notion of the "curent 
> branch"
>
> if it contains something like
>
> ref: refs/heads/master
>
> Then the current branch is master
>
> If it just contains a sha then HEAD is detached and there IS no current 
> branch.
>
> Which was my point.

Well, again, you're right and we do not have any disagreement about
what role the HEAD ref plays in the repository.
But my nitpicking was about a different issue really.
Now let me try linguistic approach. ;-)
When anyone reads "current branch's HEAD", they clearly see the usage
of the possessive case; I'm sure you know for what it is used.
In our case, the only way to parse the sentence leads the reader to a
conclusion that every branch in Git somehow possesses, that is,
references or controls (or whatever) its own HEAD reference, when in
fact it's the other way round -- the HEAD ref references the current
branch, and there is exactly single instance of HEAD in the
repository.

Hence why I warned: for instance, you supposedly had a firm idea about
the HEAD ref before reading that paper and thus you couldn't be
deceived by that wording, but a Git newcomer would have a good chance
to get the wrong mental picture in their head.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To post to this group, send email to git-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to