Re: Proposed git mv behavioral change
- From
Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
- Date
- Oct 20, 2007, 07:46 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20071020074654.GA3497@glandium.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20071020063014.GU14735@spearce.org>
On Sat, Oct 20, 2007 at 02:30:14AM -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> Ari Entlich <lmage11@twcny.rr.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 21:54 -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > --index is used in Git for places were we update *both* the index > > > and the working directory (git-apply --index). So actually I should > > > have suggested "git-mv --index". Whoops. > > > > Alright then, I don't know about that particular convention. If this > > behavior can't be made default, git mv --index should activate it? I > > there anything else that might be more descriptive? > > That's always the hard part. I actually think the current behavior > should be called --index as it does not only the working tree > update but also stages the whole file into the index, which is what > git-apply --index does. > > What about just -u for "keep unstaged"?
Why not --staged ? It would be more meaningful than the --cached in some other commands.
Mike