On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 12:41:30PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > I think having both is good. There are a lot of ways to accidentally > throw away work, and it's pretty frustrating to have it happen. But > the reflog is also somewhat complicated, and I've definitely seen a > lot of developers who've never heard of it, and struggle with the > concept. It's definitely good to improve on "oh, I screwed up - how can I recover?" part. > I personally think having the nice "it looks like you're about to > throw away all your changes, are you sure" style of protection using > something like --clobber-index is useful as a mode, even if we have an > index log of sorts. I don't think it's an appealing design. If we have the index reflog giving us an undo function, then it is (at least for me) irritating to have additional protection. Furthermore, this protection, to not break existing workflows, needs to be configurable. This comes with much baggage on its own. Having then two things which seem to solve the same problem setting, but somehow different, is in my opinion even more confusing in the long run. Greetings, Eckhard
