Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] Documentation: warn prominently against merging with dirty trees
- From
Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
- Date
- Jan 10, 2010, 12:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <201001101316.49164.trast@student.ethz.ch>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vskaefp2v.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> >> while possible, it leaves you in a state that is hard to > >> +back out of in the case of a conflict. > >> + > > > > Oh, that is a problem. Maybe 'git merge' should refuse to merge > > unless told otherwise, if there is a dirty index and there might be > > conflicts.
Actually I'm worried about a dirty *worktree*. Do you think that should be clarified?
Show 6 quoted lines
> "git reset --merge" will keep your local changes after such a merge, and > "mergy" operations (not just "merge" but also "revert", "am -3", etc) > won't get you into a situation where you cannot, by refusing to do > anything when e.g. your index is dirty. Especially when Christian's > "reset --merge" update becomes solid, "... is hard to back out of" will > become a false statement.
Does that apply to dirty worktrees, too? I admit I didn't follow that topic at all.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch