On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 02:38:05PM +0200, Guillaume Hoffmann wrote: > So one question for you git users: How is the darcs revert / pull / > unrevert workflow better than just pulling and resolving conflicts in > the working copy?
That's not really what I use git-stash for. Generally, I use git-stash for one of two reasons: 1) This approach doesn't look like it's going to work out, and I want to try something else, but I don't want to throw it away quite yet. 2) I need to drop whatever I'm working on NOW NOW NOW and fix a critical bug in something else. If I'm just doing the normal hack/commit/pull cycle, I'll normally wait until I get to a natural stopping point (and hence a natural committing point) before pulling. > (As a reminder, darcs enables people to pull with > dirty working copy, while git does not.) This isn't strictly true. Git will allow you to pull (or more precisely, merge: in git, pull = fetch + merge) provided that none of the dirty files in your working copy are touched by the patches you've fetched. Miles -- Colourless green ideas sleep furiously. -- Noam Chomsky _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
