From: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 07:46:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Proposed git mv behavioral change
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:
> 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