Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I would not object to > > - old behavior: revert the commit by creating an "anti-commit": > > git revert <cmit-name> > > - new extension: revert the state of the working tree to the HEAD: > > git revert [--] pathspec > > which would kind of match the semantics of "git checkout" does. That's subjective, but I would find this more misleading than the current behavior. To me, that would let beginners think that both commands do similar things, and then "why the hell does git revert HEAD^^ create a commit while git revert -- foo.c doesn't???"-kind of questions. my 2 cents, -- Matthieu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html