From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: git-rm isn't the inverse action of git-add Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 13:09:59 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <46893F61.5060401@jaeger.mine.nu> <20070702194237.GN7730@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net> <46895EA4.5040803@jaeger.mine.nu> <20070702204051.GP7730@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Yann Dirson , Christian Jaeger , git@vger.kernel.org To: Matthieu Moy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 03 14:10:10 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I5hCr-0008HY-Dm for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:10:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757960AbXGCMKH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 08:10:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757672AbXGCMKG (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 08:10:06 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:49638 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755993AbXGCMKF (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2007 08:10:05 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Jul 2007 12:10:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp032) with SMTP; 03 Jul 2007 14:10:03 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/xalwjdtXxIjmvWZG/OZ1+GhmlkZmnZfk9pMfw8/ OWivD4NBMFGYCh X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, 3 Jul 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > What's so wrong with our man pages? You know, there have been man > > hours invested in them, and they are exclusively meant for consumption > > by people who do not know about the usage of the commands... > > What's wrong is just that I shouldn't have to read a man page to avoid > data-loss. Okay, Mr Moy. How did you learn that "rm" leads to data-loss? Because it does. Hmm. How did you expect then, that git-rm does _not_ lead to data loss? If in doubt, you _have_ to read the manual. Especially if the tool is powerful. Ciao, Dscho