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"..). --
