From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-revert is one of the most misunderstood command in git, help users out. Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 12:32:24 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <1194289301-7800-1-git-send-email-madcoder@debian.org> <7vlk9cmiyq.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vsl3kjdct.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vode8j7o5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Steven Grimm , Pierre Habouzit , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 06 13:33:37 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IpNcd-0008Qo-D0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 06 Nov 2007 13:33:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755416AbXKFMdU (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:33:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755028AbXKFMdU (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:33:20 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:54333 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751019AbXKFMdT (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2007 07:33:19 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Nov 2007 12:33:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp046) with SMTP; 06 Nov 2007 13:33:17 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19da8BZEOhda6NuV8ToC8H4wvqfxf7FMPov0lMYkl 9v6NM/LBjCFfhT X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <7vode8j7o5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> Allowing people to revert or cherry pick partially by using paths > >> limiter is a very good idea; the whole "it comes from a commit so we > >> also commit" feels an utter nonsense, though. > > > > No. > > > > When "git revert " commits the result, "git revert -- > > " should, too. > > I was not questioning about that part. "If 'git revert other form> foo' does not talk about commit, it should not > commit" was what I was referring to. Well, I think that _if_ we allow "git revert " to mean "revert the changes to , relative to the index" (which would be the same as "git checkout "), then committing that change just does not make sense. And it is this behaviour that people are seeking, not "git revert ". Ciao, Dscho