From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Simplify "git reset --hard" Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 07:55:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <7v1wuvwzdv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vwtcnvk76.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vr72vvigy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 15 16:56:16 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FfeUW-0007bt-Lw for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 15 May 2006 16:56:13 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751395AbWEOO4J (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 10:56:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751444AbWEOO4J (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 10:56:09 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:51111 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751395AbWEOO4I (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2006 10:56:08 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k4FEu0tH007788 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 15 May 2006 07:56:01 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k4FEtxSV005274; Mon, 15 May 2006 07:56:00 -0700 To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vr72vvigy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.74__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.134 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 15 May 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > read-tree -u one-way merge fix to check out locally modified paths. > > The "-u" flag means "update the working tree files", but to > other types of merges, it also implies "I want to keep my local > changes" -- because they prevent local changes from getting lost > by using verify_uptodate. The one-way merge is different from > other merges in that its purpose is opposite of doing something > else while keeping unrelated local changes. The point of > one-way merge is to nuke local changes. So while it feels > somewhat wrong that this actively loses local changes, it is the > right thing to do. Ack. On the other hand, I wonder if it might not make sense to have this part potentially depend on the "--reset" flag. That way you wouldn't even have to apologize for it. Linus