Junio C Hamano <gitster <at> pobox.com> writes: > Perhaps you can prepare a documentation patch to make it clear that git > WILL preserve the LOCAL CHANGES to the working tree? Or to put that another way, git WILL NOT "rewind" those local changes when switching branches (which I still think is the more common case for new users than failing to branch before editing files). Or refuse to switch if you have some. Except for when it does. I'll give a shot, though I don't know how good it'll be. Off the top of my head, I don't see any good way to explain the inconsistency with LOCAL CHANGES sometimes preventing switches and sometimes not, based on what is to the user an arbitrary set of rules that has nothing to do with the *current state* of the worktree, but rather the state of those files in prior commits. But sure, I'll see if I can come up with something. If nothing else, having the manpage at least explain what "M" means; that it can be potentially disastrous; and what you need to do to avoid it, would be a definite plus. -- 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