[OT] Question about Git branches

[Frank Millman]

"Chris Angelico" <rosuav at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:CAPTjJmr5gh8=1zPjG_KdTmA2QgT_5jj=kh=jyvRFv1atL1EeKw at mail.gmail.com...
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko at pacujo.net> wrote:
>> "Frank Millman" <frank at chagford.com>:
>>
>>> You are encouraged to make liberal use of 'branches',
>>
>> Personally, I only use forks, IOW, "git clone". I encourage that
>> practice. Then, there is little need for "git checkout". Instead, I just
>> cd to a different directory.
>>
>> Branches and clones are highly analogous processwise; I would go so far
>> as to say that they are redundant.
>
> But rather than listening to, shall we say, *strange* advice like
> this, Frank, you'll do well to pick up a reliable git tutorial, which
> should explain branches, commits, the working tree, etc, etc, etc.
>

I don't want to turn this into a full-on Git discussion, so briefly -

1. I have read all the 'git' tutorials I can find, but they have not 
addressed my question.
2. Albert's response 'commit or stash files before switching branches' makes 
sense, and actually answers my question.
3. I have sympathy for Marko's position of using clones rather than 
branches. I realise it does not follow the 'git' philosophy, but it does 
make it more obvious 'where you are', and lessens the chances of shooting 
yourself in the foot.

Frank