On Monday 19 January 2009, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote about 'Re: [PATCH,v4] git-checkout(1): mention fate of extraneous files': >On Tue, 20 Jan 2009, jidanni@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> Signed-off-by: jidanni <jidanni@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> OK thanks Johannes. >> I'm still worried that there is no exact statement on the fate of the >> various different classes of files, but OK, moving this to only a SEE >> ALSO. > >You completely misread me. So I will say it out directly: I think no >patch is needed. I think some users will expect to get a clean checkout when simply doing "git checkout <branch>". It would be nice for the documentation mention that is not the case, and reference the tool that helps get the tree into that state. Just my opinion, though. It seems natural to me for this to be mentioned in the 'git checkout' documentation. Perhaps there's a better place? -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
