"git status" carefully names a detached HEAD "at" resp. "from" a rev or
ref depending on whether the detached HEAD has moved since. "git branch"
always uses "from", which can be confusing, because a status-aware user
would interpret this as moved detached HEAD.
Make "git branch" use the same logic and wording.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This prints more helpful info when HEAD is detached: is it detached
because of bisect or rebase? What is the original branch name in those
cases? Is it detached because the user checks out a remote ref or a
tag (and which one)?
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"branch -v" without other options or parameters still works in the list
mode, but that is not because there is "-v" but because there is no
parameter nor option.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Allow pattern arguments for the list mode just like for git tag -l.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently, there is no way to invoke the list mode explicitly, without
giving -v to force verbose output.
Introduce a --list option which invokes the list mode. This will be
beneficial for invoking list mode with pattern matching, which otherwise
would be interpreted as branch creation.
Along with --list, test also combinations of existing options.
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Gettextize the "(no branch)" message that's shown by "git branch" when
you're in a detached HEAD.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Breaks in a test assertion's && chain can potentially hide
failures from earlier commands in the chain.
Commands intended to fail should be marked with !, test_must_fail, or
test_might_fail. The examples in this patch do not require that.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We were not testing the output of "git branch" anywhere.
Not only does this not protect us against regressions in the
output, but we are not exercising code paths which may have
bugs (such as the one fixed by 45e2b61).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
