Am 23.08.19 um 19:03 schrieb Pratyush Yadav: > So how about we keep a copy of the diff in another variable. This allows > us to enable undoing of reverts. The obvious limitations are that > firstly, unless we use a stack/deque that means only one undo is > allowed. I'm not sure if using an undo stack would be worth the added > complexity. Secondly, if the working tree is changed between the revert > and the undo, there are chances of a merge conflict. > > If people are okay with these limitations, we can be rid of the > confirmation dialog while providing a safety net. Sounds like a good > idea? Yes, sounds like an idea worth persuing. -- Hannes
