Re: Obscure error/warning/information message from git pull

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sergey Organov <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:57:34 +0300
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> It's the latter that I've tried to help to achieve. Sorry if I
> >> failed.
> >
> > You cannot help people understand new tools if you start by telling
> > them to forget everything they've learned.  You should instead build
> > on what they know, or think they know, gradually replacing that with
> > new knowledge.
> 
> Sorry, but I really think that to better understand Git, one should
> forget, at least temporarily, some things she learned from other VCSes.

Then we will have to agree to disagree.

> >> My point is that branch name doesn't represent anything else but
> >> particular reference to particular commit in Git.
> >
> > No, it also represents all the previous commits made on that branch
> > that are reachable through first-parents.
> 
> Well, given the following history (time goes from left to right):
> 
>              - C - D <- foo
>            / 
> ... - A - B
>            \
>              - E - F <- bar
> 
> 
> what branch commit A was made on, 'foo' or 'bar'?

Depends on when each one of the branches was created, of course.

> You see, you should have had no "made on that branch" in your
> description, provided you describe Gits' idea of a branch, not your one,
> as Git does not remember on what branch commit was made.

But that's the whole point of our disagreement: I'm talking about what
human users mean when they say "branch", while you keep talking about
what Git means.  When you try to explain to a human something that
involves branches, you had better did it in human terms, not program
implementation terms.  AKA "concept" vs "implementation".