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.