Re: [PATCH] added a built-in alias for 'stage' to the 'add' command
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Dec 1, 2008, 18:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20081201182557.GA24443@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20081201172902.GA41963@agadorsparticus>
On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 09:29:02AM -0800, Scott Chacon wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> this comes from conversation at the GitTogether where we thought it would > be helpful to be able to teach people to 'stage' files because it tends > to cause confusion when told that they have to keep 'add'ing them. > > This continues the movement to start referring to the index as a > staging area (eg: the --staged alias to 'git diff'). Also added a > doc file for 'git stage' that basically points to the docs for > 'git add'.
FWIW, I think this is a step in the right direction. Or at least if it's the wrong direction, I don't think we're actually _hurting_ anybody, since we're not changing existing commands.
Out of curiosity, have you had any experiences referring to this as "git stage" (maybe just by setting a per-user alias) with new users?
Show 6 quoted lines
> +SYNOPSIS > +-------- > +[verse] > +'git stage' [-n] [-v] [--force | -f] [--interactive | -i] [--patch | -p] > + [--all | [--update | -u]] [--intent-to-add | -N] > + [--refresh] [--ignore-errors] [--] <filepattern>...
It seems like this might get stale with respect to git-add(1). Since we're not hiding the fact that this is really an alias for "add", maybe it would be better to just have "git stage [options] [--] <filepattern>" (or maybe even something simpler).
-Peff