Re: non-empty index with git commit -a
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Feb 16, 2011, 08:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20110216085114.GA9413@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <AANLkTinbcHW+ja7T=PiCEorNdnK6W2DvA_c9F8JTEMKB@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:18:18AM +0000, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 03:20, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote: > > If I remember the discussion[1] correctly, by requiring a separate > > add -u step (or commit -f -a) if the "I don't trust my fingers" > > configuration is enabled. > > That would definitely work for me. The question then is, should git > consider the index precious by default, or not? That is, should that > value default to true in 1.8?
If we do not consider the index precious, then no, it should not be the default. If we do consider it precious, then isn't this option fixing one small case and leaving all of the others untouched?
I can just as easily run "git add -u", or "git add -p" on top of some changes and then realize afterwards that I actually wanted the previous index state.
The solution for that would be an index reflog.
-Peff