Re: [PATCH] checkout.txt: note about losing staged changes with --merge

>
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> I think "checkout -m <otherbranch>" with a dirty index should refuse
> >> to run; there is nothing to "continue" after such a failure, so I am
> >> not sure what you mean by "an option to continue" (iow, I do not see
> >> a need for such an option, and if that option makes the whole notion
> >> strange, we can just decide not to have it, can't we?).
> >
> > We have --force to continue even when we have local changes, which
> > will be overwritten. I was thinking a similar option which gives us
> > permission to destroy staged changes.
>
> Ah, then that is not "checkout --continue", but "checkout --force
> -m"?  That sounds sensible, and should behave as if "checkout -f
> HEAD && checkout -m <otherbranch>" was done, with respect to local
> changes, I would think.