RE: Git feature request: Option to force Git to abort a checkout if working directory is dirty (i.e. disregarding the check for conflicts)

> "Jonas Bang" writes: > > >> >> ... The default behaviour would cover their use case so your > >> >> proposal would not hurt them, but I wonder if there are things you > >> >> could do to help them as well, perhaps by allowing th

RE: Git feature request: Option to force Git to abort a checkout if working directory is dirty (i.e. disregarding the check for conflicts)

> >> For some people it is also a norm to keep files that have been > >> modified from HEAD and/or index without committing for a long time > >> (e.g. earlier, Linus said that the version in Makefile is updated and > >> kept modified in the working tree long before a new release is > >> committed w

RE: Git feature request: Option to force Git to abort a checkout if working directory is dirty (i.e. disregarding the check for conflicts)

Thanks for your feedback, Junio, I have added more details and tried to simplify the request. > "Jonas Bang" writes: > > > Hi Git developers, > > > > This is my first Git feature request, I hope it won’t get me hanged on > > the gallows ;o) > > &

Git feature request: Option to force Git to abort a checkout if working directory is dirty (i.e. disregarding the check for conflicts)

s created while on branch #1 will not be carried over when changing to branch #2, i.e. you will work strictly context based always. *Usecase also described here:* http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22609566/how-to-force-git-to-abort-a-chec kout-if-working-directory-is-not-clean-i-e-dis Br, Jonas