Alexandre Julliard <julliard@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Refuse to revert a file if it is modified in an existing buffer but > not saved. What's the point? What if I do want to have modified buffer and still revert the on-disk file? Why git-revert cares to the level of prohibiting this? Besides, it's inconsistent with the rest of Emacs, I think, as in similar situations Emacs usually allows to either save the buffer(s), do not save the buffer(s) and continue, or abort operation (I suppose using (save-some-buffers) call, though I didn't check). See, for example, how (compile) behaves when some of buffers are not saved. In fact I believe the way PCL-CVS handles this, and that was implemented in my earlier patch, is superior compared to this patch. An addition of save-some-buffers call won't hurt either, but IMHO is not very useful in the specific case of git-revert. BTW, what definitely lacks (save-some-buffers) call is git-commit, as it silently commits on-disk state of a file when corresponding buffer is modified. > On success, revert the buffers that contains the files that have been > reverted. This part is indeed very handy. -- Sergei Organov. - 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
