Re: git-ls-files --added?

From: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Date: May 24, 2009, 09:12 UTC
Message-ID: <2cfc40320905240212jc111b1xfeb39b1851c606d3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3fxeudhho.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

Jakub,

Thanks - yes, I wasn't happy about parsing git status.

I am still interested in the rationale for git-ls-files not supporting such an option directly, since git-diff still seems a little indirect.

Regards,

jon.

On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Is there a reason why git-ls-files does not have an --added option?
>>
>> I'd like to get a list of new files, due to be committed. Currently, I
>> have to parse the output of git status to get that, but it seems like
>> a reasonable function for git-ls-files.
>
> You can use git-diff-* with --name-only and --diff-filter=A for
> that; you shouldn't parse result of porcelain git-status.
>
> And there is also contrib/examples/git-commit.sh as a guideline...
>
> --
> Jakub Narebski
> Poland
> ShadeHawk on #git
>