Re: EasyGit Integration

From: Björn Steinbrink <b.steinbrink@gmx.de>
Date: Jun 9, 2009, 20:37 UTC
Message-ID: <20090609203747.GB13781@atjola.homenet>
In-Reply-To: <32541b130906091252i6c96c44buc148bb525d7cde14@mail.gmail.com>

On 2009.06.09 15:52:46 -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Scott Chacon<schacon@gmail.com> wrote:
> > * breaks the various things that 'checkout' does into separate
> > commands - moves 'revert' to doing what 'checkout -- path' does, moves
> > current 'revert' to 'cherry-pick --revert' (which someone mentioned
> > was a good idea at the last GitTogether), and adds 'unstage' for
> > 'reset HEAD file'.  also adds a '-s' option to 'branch' to switch to
> > the branch after you create it, which many people expect rather than
> > 'checkout -b'.
> 
> This would definitely make it easier to explain things to svn users.
> To be honest, I'm not convinced svn's use of the word "revert" is
> really right, though.  Git's isn't *really* right either, since it
> actually makes a new commit, it doesn't remove the old one like it
> sounds like it does.  Maybe 'reverse' would be a better name for what
> git does, and we should just introduce another word for what svn does.
>  (With CVS, you just deleted the file and then did a checkout/update
> on it again, which made sense to me.  That works in git too.)
> 
> Crazy idea: we could actually make 'git revert' do both: given a
> commit, it applies the reverse as it does now.  Given filenames, it
> simply brings them back to HEAD.  But maybe that's too crazy.

Doesn't seem that crazy to me. But maybe a bit problematic if you want to support both, "git checkout -- ." and "git checkout HEAD -- .". And adding DWIMmery there seems dangerous, as in:

git revert == git checkout -- .

git revert HEAD ==
  no uncommitted changes = revert commit HEAD
  uncommitted changes = revert to HEAD

Björn