Re: Question about "git commit -a"

From: Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 7, 2007, 14:50 UTC
Message-ID: <37fcd2780710070750g23deb2e1q1b9a7e5c555a44bf@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <470878CB.2010609@gmx.net>

On 10/7/07, Marko Macek <Marko.Macek@gmx.net> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Dmitry Potapov wrote:
> > You don't. Even with 'commit -a' there is no guarantee that the
> > result will compile, because you can forget to add a new file.
>
> Actually, it would be a good idea for commit to report an error if there
> are any new files that have not been 'added' or 'ignored'

If it is good for you, you can add this check to your pre-commit hook. However, I don't like your idea at all. Sometimes, you do want to have some file that is not 'added' or 'ignored' as a reminder that you have something else to do. IMHO, git acts in the most reasonable way in this respect. When you say 'commit -a' and you have some files not added, it will show you all untracked files in your editor when you type a commit message. So, it is more difficult to forget to add a new file with git than with many other version control systems.

> (or even
> if there are missing files that have not been 'deleted'.

Actually, 'commit -a' will automatically delete all missing files. IMHO, it is the right thing to do.

Dmitry