Re: RFC: perhaps a "new file" should not be deleted by "git reset --hard"
- From
- Eric Raible <raible@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 11, 2008, 22:19 UTC
- Message-ID
- <279b37b20809111519o76bea81br738983b4cda1978e@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vd4jas6x8.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Eric Raible <raible@gmail.com> writes: > >> But can you see a downside to "git reset --hard" treating newly >> added files as "git reset"? > > Of course. The --hard option is called --hard without inviting short > option for a reason. > > [various good reasons snipped]
Thanks for the definitive response. I suppose that I had been getting rather cavalier about --hard. Now my expectations are more aligned with reality.
And that reality makes perfect sense, it's just a bit harsh when hundreds of important files get obliterated!
- Eric