Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:
> stephen_le...@stephe-leake.org writes:
>> However, in this case, even running the fetch was a mistake; I would
>> have prefered that it leave FETCH_HEAD in its previous state.
> I think the clearing of leftover FETCH_HEAD is one of the early
> things "git fetch" does, unless "--append" is in effect. I haven't
> looked at the code for a long time, but it may be possible to move
> the logic of doing so around so that this clearing is done as lazily
> as possible.
> I however suspect that such a change may have fallouts on other
> people who are writing tools like yours; they may be depending on
> seeing FETCH_HEAD cleared after a failed fetch, and be surprised to
> see a stale contents after they (attempt to) run "git fetch" in it.
> So it is not so clear if it is a good thing to change the behaviour
> of "git fetch" not to touch FETCH_HEAD upon a failure.
Ok; backwards compatibility is important.
Perhaps FETCH_HEAD could be copied to FETCH_HEAD_prev or some such, to
allow recovering in an error case?
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