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

From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@imag.fr>
Date: Jul 2, 2007, 20:54 UTC
Message-ID: <vpq7ipittl2.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <20070702204051.GP7730@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>

Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> writes:

> That is, "git rm" will only ever remove the file without asking, when
> it is safe do so, in that you can retrieve your file from history.  Or
> do you think of another way, in which more safety would be needed ?

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) $ _

-- 
Matthieu