Duy Nguyen <pclo...@gmail.com> writes:

> Prevent is a strong word. I meant we only do it if they force
> it. Something like this..
> -- 8< --
> diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c
> index 723a36b..3f0540f 100644
> --- a/branch.c
> +++ b/branch.c
> @@ -251,6 +251,11 @@ void create_branch(const char *head,
>                       forcing = 1;
>       }
> +     if (!force && dwim_ref(name, strlen(name), sha1, &real_ref))
> +             die(_("creating ref refs/heads/%s makes %s ambiguous.\n"
> +                   "Use -f to create it anyway."),
> +                 name, name);

Does this check still allow you to create a branch "refs/heads/next"
and then later create a branch "next"?  The latter will introduce an
ambiguity without any prevention, even though the prevention would
trigger if the order in which these two branches are created is
swapped--- the end result has ambiguity but the safety covers only
one avenue to the confusing situation.

And the only way I can think of to avoid that kind of confusion is
to forbid creation of a subset of possible names by reserving a set
of known (but arbitrary) prefixes---which I am not sure is a good
way to go.  At least not yet.

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

Reply via email to