On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 12:12:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think this is not "DWIM" but is "-f does not work with -b; fix it". > > Will queue; thanks. I am not sure it is fixing a bug. There are really two possible things to be forced during checkout: 1. throw away local changes 2. overwrite an existing branch Right now, "checkout -f" means just (1). This patch makes it _also_ mean (2). Do we want to conflate those two cases? In some sense, it is reasonable for "-f" to mean "force anything that might be questionable". But I wonder if it pays to be a little more conservative given that this is a safety valve we are talking about. The user can of course still split their compound action into: git branch [-f] new_branch old_branch git checkout [-f] new_branch Less convenient, but there is no ambiguity. I dunno. I don't have a strong feeling on how it should be, but I think it is more than a simple bug fix. -Peff -- 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