On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 11:48:33 PM UTC+1, Carsten wrote:

> Hi again, 
> Am 11.01.2013 11:38, schrieb Carsten Fuchs: 
> > [...] 
> > So my real question is, why does Git not do something analogous? 
> > (Afaics, update the HEAD, update the Index, but leave the working-copy 
> edition alone?) 
> > 
> > I searched for this beforehand, and most advice involves either 
> stashing, or with "git 
> > reset --hard" the loss of the untracked files. 
> Anyone? 

If you want to know why Git is implemented the way it is, you probably 
should ask on the developers' mailing list: https://gist.github.com/4441562 

My guess is that it has just always behaved that way, and changing it now 
would surprise too many users. Personally I would find it very disturbing 
if "merge" started modifying my index (the only commands that should modify 
my index are "add" and "reset"..).


Reply via email to