From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 03:43:47 GMT
Subject: git diff --added (Re: Command-line interface thoughts)
Message-ID: <20110613034347.GA4222@elie>
In-Reply-To: <4DF29EA5.60502@ira.uka.de>

Holger Hellmuth wrote:

> User never heard of 'staged'. He asks instead "I want to see what I
> added" --> git diff --added --> Error Message --> User checks man page,
> again

Do you think it would be valuable to introduce --added as a synonym
for --cached and slowly steer documentation to encourage the latter
in place of the former?

Examples, to see how it could work in practice:

	# Instead of searching tracked files in the working tree,
	# search blobs registered in the index file (i.e., accepted
	# with "git add" instead of the iffy hacks that are up in
	# the air).  The main advantage of this over plain "git grep"
	# is speed.
	git grep --added -e foo

	# Remove foo.c from the next commit, without touching the
	# worktree.
	git rm --added foo.c

	# Apply patch to the index, leaving the worktree alone.
	git apply --added some-change.patch

	# List changes that I marked with "git add" for inclusion in
	# the next commit.
	git diff --added

I like it a lot more than "staged". ;-)  Though --index-only still
seems a little clearer to me.