Johannes Schindelin wrote:

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote:

quoted

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

quoted

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

quoted

* Reflog

 - Reflog records the history of where the tip of each branch
   was at each moment.

It might make sense to reformulate that:

      Reflog records the history from the view point of the local 
      repository. In other words, regardless of the real history,
      the reflog shows the history as seen by one particular repository
      (this enables you to ask "what was the current revision in _this_
      repository, yesterday at 1pm?").

I think that _both_ sentences are right. Reflog records history of where the
tip of each branch was at each moment, logging also what command was used
to move tip of branch (was it commit, amending commit, rebase, reset, or
creating branch anew, git-am or pull).

But where tip of each branch was is purely local matter. What is global
is DAG of commits, refs are always as seen by one particular repository.

What I meant was: people not familiar with git development will probably 
not understand the shorter, concise statement. They will not know off-hand 
that there is a difference between the history of development, and the 
history, as seen from the local repository's viewpoint.

So of course, both sentences are right.

Your point -- that reflog also records the action -- is less important 
IMHO. It is just meta-data of the local view.

To your second point: the global history remains global, of course. But 
this is what you _usually_ refer to, when talking about the development 
history, anyway. Therefore, to motivate reflogs, you should point out the 
differences between local and global history.

And this means to at least _mention_ the word "local".

So I'd say:

  - Reflog records local history of where the tip of each branch
    was at each moment.

I think both "local" and "tip of branch" are important
for understanding reflog.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland