> The other use case is the one that git already assumes to be popular: > People want local modifications to remain in place across branch checkouts. Are there software developers (besides me) who would like to work in the opposite way on demand? How are the chances to make unfinished and uncommitted content updates sticky for a particular branch (or a selection of branches) so that changes will not be mixed more as it will be really required for an editing task? > The "git checkout" command is designed to carry local modifications > across branches transparently; Which wording will be preferred to "reflect" this fact in the manual and other documentation? Regards, Markus -- 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