3 ms·
If someone pushes to a repo you should expect the refs to change. In some sense doing nothing avoids surprise but it's a bad way to avoid surprise. But my rea
by Dylan16807 1y ago
If someone pushes to a repo you should expect the refs to change. In some sense doing nothing avoids surprise but it's a bad way to avoid surprise.
But my real point is that refusing to act is not "the only sane [default] option" here. Mild ergonomic issues aren't a disqualifier.
- seba_dos1 1y agoIf you use "git branch -d" you should expect the ref to be deleted, and yet: > error: cannot delete branch 'main' used by worktree at '/tmp/git' You could build the system differently and what seems like a sane default would be different there, but it would be a different system. In this system, HEAD isn't being manipulated by things not meant to manipulate it.