Re: git-rm isn't the inverse action of git-add

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jul 2, 2007, 21:05 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707022205210.4071@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <vpq7ipittl2.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

Hi,

On Mon, 2 Jul 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Defaulting to --cached would be an obvious way to avoid data-loss. _At 
> least_, mentionning --cached in the error message in case of staged 
> changes would be a considerable step forward.
> 
> At the moment, the non-expert user will have difficulties to unversion 
> the file without deleting it. I just see it as
> 
> $ git rm foo
> error: 'foo' has changes staged in the index
> (hint: to hang yourself, try -f)
> $ _

What's so wrong with our man pages? You know, there have been man hours invested in them, and they are exclusively meant for consumption by people who do not know about the usage of the commands...

Hth, Dscho