Re: [FAQ?] Rationale for git's way to manage the index

From: Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com>
Date: May 10, 2007, 02:27 UTC
Message-ID: <4642831C.2090401@midwinter.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vzm4dplhu.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> I obviously agree with this.  As I said a few times I regret
> introducing "add -i" --- it encourages a wrong workflow, in that
> what you commit in steps never match what you had in the working
> tree and could have tested until the very end.
>

On the other hand, not all changes require any testing at all. For example, if you're using git to manage documentation, it is totally reasonable to commit a fix for a simple spelling error in one part of a file while not committing an in-progress rewrite of another part.

-Steve

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.