Andy Whitcroft writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org> writes:
> >
> >>> +static void wt_status_print_cached_header(const char *reference)
> >>> +{
> >>> + const char *c = color(WT_STATUS_HEADER);
> >>> + color_printf_ln(c, "# Cached changes to be committed:");
> >>> ...
> >> We seem to be using 'Cached' and 'staged' here. I thought we had
> >> updated all the docs to call files in the index "Staged for commit".
> >
> > # Changes staged to be committed:
> >
> > Somebody did not like the verb "stage"; perhaps we can say:
> >
> > # You have added changes to these files to be committed:
> > ...
>
> # These files have changes and are marked for commit:
>
> > # There are yet to be added changes to these files:
>
> # These files have changes but are not marked for commit:Does this better reflect that git tracks content and not files?
# Changes to these files will be committed:
# Changes to these files are not marked for commit:
BTW: how about also adding a hint how to review the changes in
question (i.e. diff --cached and diff; as an alternative to diff
--cached we could just advertise the --verbose switch to status and
commit).