On Aug 16, 3:31 pm, Sitaram Chamarty <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Jeenu<[email protected]> wrote: > [snip] > > So I guess it's a "globally accepted behavior", and I just live with > > it :) > > Actually, it's got nothing to do with "accepted". No other meaningful > behaviour is even possible. > > Let's say you're on branch B, and then checkout branch A. > > Git has no way to distinguish between this file that you say should > not get deleted, and some other file that really should only exist in > B and therefore _should_ get deleted when moving to A.
It makes sense when you track a project or set of files from the beginning. That way you know what gets created when et.al. so it's easy to decide what goes to where. But, say, when one's trying to track a set of existing (set of) files, I find this removal inappropriate. I'm trying to use GIT because I don't know what files I'm going to change, so I don't know what to add to GIT in advance. In my case at least, I wondered where my file went, later realizing GIT deleted it because it was tracked on one branch, but not on another. At the same time, it wasn't feasible for me to add the whole set to GIT, their number being so huge. After all, removal is a destructive operation! :J --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GitHub" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/github?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
