[Dropping "Jonathan Gilbert [off-list ref]" from the To: list because 
my mail server says "Domain not found". Putting the GGG address in To: 
instead.]

On 02/11/19 11:41PM, Jonathan Gilbert wrote:

On Sat, Nov 2, 2019, 8:12 PM Pratyush Yadav, [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 30/10/19 12:16PM, Jonathan Gilbert wrote:

quoted

It's less about overloading the 'revert' operation as overloading the
UI action which is currently called "Revert". I think it would be a
worse experience to have to activate a different option to remove
unwanted files as to remove unwanted changes. Maybe the UI option
could be renamed "Revert & Clean" or something?

I disagree. There are valid workflows where you want to remove all
changes to tracked files, but leave untracked ones alone. As an example,
say you wrote a small script to fix some textual things, like your
variable re-name patch. Now you run a diff before you commit those
changes just to be sure, and notice that your script was overzealous and
made some changes it shouldn't have. So, you clean up all tracked files,
and give your script a fresh start. Here, you don't want to delete your
script.

And in the other direction, say you want to delete all untracked files
but have unstaged changes in your tracked files. Combining "Revert" and
"Clean" does not give you an option to only delete untracked files. So
you now either have to stash your changes, or run `git clean` from the
command line.

But, since this is in this GUI interface, you can clearly see which
are which and select only the files you want to affect. If you have so
many files that you have to select indiscriminately, then the
command-line is probably a better choice anyway. In any case, my
proposed change prompts for each part of the change, so you _can_ just
select everything, press ^J, and then say "Yes" to only one of the
prompts.

Ah yes! Makes sense. I got too tunnel-visioned when thinking about this, 
and lost context. Sorry.
 

quoted

quoted

As a side note, `git clean untracked-file` won't do anything with a
default configuration, you have to explicitly `-f` it. Not sure if
that's relevant, but it does feel like a higher barrier to entry than
`git revert`.

`git revert` is different from our "Revert", though I admit the naming
is quite confusing.

[..]

quoted

So I don't think you should, or _can_, use `git revert` for what you
want to do. And so, I don't see why it is being factored in with this
discussion. Am I missing something?

You are entirely correct, this was just a massive brain fart. Every
time I wrote `git revert` in my head I was actually thinking of
exactly what Git Gui does, reverting working copy changes by checking
out the file. I should have written "reverting using `git checkout`".
My apologies!

In my defence, I have over the past few days found myself digging into
code hosted in SVN repositories, and `svn revert` does exactly what
`git checkout` does to an unstaged modified file. :-)

I have never used svn, but I can imagine now confusing that might be ;)

-- 
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav