On Saturday 06 March 2010 09:10:34 Peter Baumann wrote:
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 09:25:36PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote:
quoted
and give an example to show how it can be used.
+--keep::
+ Resets the index to match the tree recorded by the named commit,
+ but keep changes in the working tree. Aborts if the reset would
+ change files that are already modified in the working tree.
+
Huh? Keep changes (by not touching the worktree)
Keep uncommited changes in the working tree does not mean not touching the
working tree.
and then aborting if we
touch the worktree.
We abort if the commit we reset touch some files that have uncommited changes.
Seems like a contradiction to me.
There is no contradiction. We repeat "working tree" too much perhaps, but what
is important is to focus on "changes" and "files".
Regards,
Christian.