Re: git and bzr
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Nov 29, 2006, 10:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611291145510.30004@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <456CBCD5.3050505@onlinehome.de>
Hi,
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Nicholas Allen wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> [Linus wrote...] > > > > So the tools are certainly there. "git status" just isn't necessarily the > > best one (or the best that it could be, for that matter).. > > I guess I hit a limitation in the output of status as opposed to a > limitation in what git can do ;-)
I think it is something different altogether: you learnt how to use CVS, and you learnt how to use bzr, and you are now biased towards using the same names for the same operations in git.
I actually use git-status quite often, just before committing, to know what I changed. But I will probable retrain my mind to use "git diff" or even "git diff --stat", because it is more informative.
As for your scenario: There really should be a "what to do when my merge screwed up?" document.
Ciao, Dscho