On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 02:40:30AM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> > If we were going to separate the two commands out, I'd use the name
> > "git revert-file", because that's what people who are coming from bk
> > or hg are used to (where "revert" means to undo the local edits done
> > to a particular file, as opposed to the git meaning of undoing a
> > particular commit).
>
> Nah, that would create confusion within git, because it does something
> totally different from git revert. And checkout can also checkout a
> whole tree, not just a file. So you would either need revert-tree as
> well... Or add more confusion, because revert-file "reverting" a tree is
> not quite intuitive.
That's why I said "git revert-file" as being different from "git
revert". If you want to revert the entire tree in the sense of
"undoing local edits", most people today use "git reset --hard".
> Maybe it's just a misunderstanding on my side, but to me "checkout"
> means as much as "get me something out of the repo".
If that's true, why is the one-line summary in the git-checkout man
page and in the git top-level man page read as follows?
git-checkout - Checkout and switch to a branch
At the very least, will you admit that the summary in the man page is
perhaps just a wee bit misleading?
- Ted
--
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
