On 11/6/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Git does merge with a dirty directory too, but refuses to merge if it > needs to *change* any individual dirty *files*. Understood. > [...] > Now, I do think that we could relax the rule so that "files that are > modified must be clean in the working tree" could instead become "files > that actually don't merge _trivially_ must be clean in the working tree". > But basically, if it's not a trivial merge, then since it's done in the > working tree, the working tree has to be clean (or the merge would > overwrite it). >[...] I really think this is a good idea. It seems to me that the first "bad" surprise a svn/cvs/bk user will have is the result of a "git pull" command on a dirty tree. With the proposed change, and if I understand correctly: - users that are used to commit often and fetch into clean trees will never be bothered by this change. - users that are used to "update" often are expecting to resolve conflicts in their working copy anyway. In both cases git does not get in your way and everyone is happy. - Aghiles - 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
