Re: Git branches - confusing behavior

From: Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com>
Date: May 12, 2008, 07:49 UTC
Message-ID: <buohcd4ufl0.fsf@dhapc248.dev.necel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4826F72D.2070205@gmail.com>

Dima Kagan <dima.kagan@gmail.com> writes:

> My proposed change shouldn't necessarily break the described
> workflow. Git can keep the current behavior for new branches, but
> automatically 'stash' the changes when checking-out an existing
> branch.

It's not going to happen, at least by default. Many people already rely on -- and like -- the current behavior, which is often quite convenient (edit some files and then realize "oh, I should commit these to another branch"... no prob! :-).

Occasionally it is inconvenient, of course, but git offers mechanisms to use in such cases, most notably "git stash" (and of course super-cheap local branches which can be amended or even deleted later).

I think the real problem here is that you haven't quite gotten used to git yet.

-Miles

-- 
Faith, n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without
knowledge, of things without parallel.