Can someone please explain to me why git-checkout is overloaded so that you can get a branch (git checkout master) and also restore a file from the current branch HEAD (git checkout hello.c)? It seems like a misplaced overload. Wouldn’t git-revert be a better overload?
Anways, this confused the hell out of me this morning for some reason.
this post was added on friday july 25th 2008 around 8am. it was added to the longer category and was tagged: git, opinion
award tour is a weblog which usually concerns pop culture, web dev, the tech biz, toronto, politics, and random funny shit.
both the posts and the comments on this site are syndicated for your feed reading pleasure.
awardtour.net is produced by tyler rooney. please drop me a line if you have any questions or comments.
I think it’d be more confusing if you overloaded revert, since it normally results in a new commit, but checkout doesn’t change your commit tree.
valid. still confusing though.
Yeah I agree. In CVS you do the same thing by removing the file you have edited and running cvs update to grab the latest version. That is a bit more intuitive, since update pulls changes from the main repository into your working directory. I guess in this case it kind of makes sense, as checkout works on your own repository, as opposed to say pull or something.
Anyway, I still find git a bit strange to use, but I like it way more than cvs/svn.