The problem is you have to be careful where you move the branch. For historical reference here is the discussion I had with Pieter about it: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/gitx/HwP-toGQAn0
And here is the commit where I blocked moving the head branch: https://github.com/brotherbard/gitx/commit/986f49f70a7890128c0c250a4d1cacbb04f700d1 If you are just changing the previous commit use the Amend checkbox under the commit message and you can then stage new changes or discard existing ones. --Nathan http://brotherbard.com/ On Jan 22, 2013, at 12:19 PM, Prakash Nadar wrote: > exactly! it should not change the working copy and thats what GitX does… the > diff changes are put in the staging area and you can upstage and discard any > change that you don't want to go or modify it. Think of it as interactive > rebase. > > -prakash > > On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Edward Rudd wrote: > >> I simply checkout a new branch (temp) then move the master. >> >> Otherwise just moving the branch point is kinda "icky" as you working copy >> wouldn't be updated. >> >> On Jan 22, 2013, at 14:11 , Prakash Nadar wrote: >> >>> Original Gitx Supports moving the branch on checkout branch as well… Since >>> I have to correct history/change then I would be doing it for the current >>> checkout branch only. So yeah, not moving to rowanj-Gitx as well. :) >>> >>> -prakash >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Edward Rudd wrote: >>> >>>> I'm using RowanJ's fork and it supports the ability to drag and drop >>>> branches still. Though only when they are not checked out. This one seems >>>> to be the most active fork too.. ( http://rowanj.github.com/gitx/ ) And >>>> it seems the gitx.org website is not listing that fork. >>>> >>>> And AFAIK every other fork I tried still had that ability on non-checked >>>> out branches. A feature I really like as well, and with gitg supported.. >>>> ( gitg is a linux/gnome GUI program "inspired" by GitX ) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 22, 2013, at 13:55 , Prakash wrote: >>>> >>>>> Let me throw in a couple of bit... I have been using GitX (the original >>>>> one) for a while and I like it the way it is, it is simple to use for >>>>> day-today activity in combination with command line git. If I have to do >>>>> something serious, repo management etc, I use sourcetree which is free >>>>> and native as well. >>>>> >>>>> One of the nice feature that GitX (original) has is ability to drag and >>>>> drop the branch-name to point to a new commit and make put the changes of >>>>> the newer commit into staging area (hope my description makes sense) >>>>> >>>>> This has allowed me many many time so correct my change easily without >>>>> using git rebase -i command. With many forks that I tried with the >>>>> sidebars ext seems to have removed or disabled this feature... >>>>> >>>>> So I strongly vote against Original GitX point to anything else unless >>>>> this problem is address. I don't want to accidentally update a newer >>>>> version of Gitx-redirect that removes this very important feature for me. >>>>> >>>>> IMO, let gitx be gitx and the forks be forks (yes all the disadvantages >>>>> of contribution going to the wrong place is understandable but not at he >>>>> cost of feature I like) >>>>> >>>>> There is a gitx.org that points to some of the gitx forks and to the >>>>> original... maybe Gitx can link to this page and give the new >>>>> users/contributors/ an idea where to go and put some effort or create a >>>>> page a similar page at original gitx site. >>>>> >>>>> -prakash >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 1:51:25 AM UTC-8, Pieter de Bie wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Johannes Gilger <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > On 14/01/13 10:41, Josh Bleecher Snyder wrote: >>>>>> >> Or Pieter could ask the community for volunteers to officially take >>>>>> >> over >>>>>> >> GitX, pick one, and make a public announcement, backed up by a >>>>>> >> statement at >>>>>> >> the top of his repo's README. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Yeah, that would be a quick reference. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm willing to update my github repo with a reference to another >>>>>> repository, or even push a final update using the built-in updater of >>>>>> GitX to download another fork. At this point, I'm not really >>>>>> interested in resurrecting GitX myself (though I still use it daliy), >>>>>> but might contribute once in a while if an active fork is created. >>>>>> >>>>>> >> > As to being "blessed", this is mostly a question of version-number >>>>>> >> > and >>>>>> >> > Google PageRank, isn't it? >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Bluntly: No, I don't think it is. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Open source projects thrive under conditions that make for good >>>>>> >> coordination. That's easiest when there's an official preferred >>>>>> >> version, >>>>>> >> with someone who is actively maintaining it -- even if >>>>>> >> that maintenance consists of nothing more than having an opinion >>>>>> >> about >>>>>> >> direction and handling pull requests. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Letting a thousand forks bloom, for a long time, each wandering their >>>>>> >> own >>>>>> >> way, is not good for anyone, users or contributors. >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree with this, the current situation is kinda confusing and nobody >>>>>> is profiting from it. >>>>>> >>>>>> > Yeah, I'm always open. Disagreements are what mailing lists are good >>>>>> > for. Let's wait if Pieter voices an oppinion. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've looked before into 'blessing' an alternate repository by >>>>>> redirecting to it; however, in the past I haven't found a fork that >>>>>> has been active enough for a long enough time to do this. I wanted to >>>>>> make sure that when I hand over control, it will continue living for a >>>>>> while instead of dying after a few weeks / months without me being >>>>>> able to do anything about it. >>>>>> >>>>>> That might not be logical -- I guess any progress is better than the >>>>>> complete absence of me for the past few years. The repo from rowanj >>>>>> looks like it's active, so it might be best to just redirect to there. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Pieter >>>> >>>> Edward Rudd >>>> OutOfOrder.cc >>>> Skype: outoforder_cc >>>> 317-674-3296 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> Edward Rudd >> OutOfOrder.cc >> Skype: outoforder_cc >> 317-674-3296 >> >> >> >> >> >> >
