From: Josh Triplett <josh@freedesktop.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:30:10 GMT
Subject: Re: most commonly used git commands?
Message-ID: <46831D32.4090900@freedesktop.org>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90706271917j7abb4bddu21debafe3461c695@mail.gmail.com>

Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On 6/25/07, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@dev.mellanox.co.il> writes:
>>>> Quoting Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>>> Perhaps they are most commonly used by the person who came up
>>>> with that list first ;-)?
>>>>
>>>> I think "add" deserves to be there, I am not sure "apply" is.
>>> git add is supposed to be rare, no?
>>> That's why git commit lists file additions/removals ...
>> No.  You are talking in terms of pre-1.5 git.  The semantics of
>> "git add" has been clarified since then --- it adds contents,
>> and is not about telling git that there are new files it did not
>> know so far.
> 
> In other words - git-add is also a (semantically good) alias for
> git-update-index.
> 
> So you "add" files to the next commit. Whether they are "new" to git
> or just changed it doesn't matter that much in that situation. And
> git-commit will look at those files that have been "added".
> 
> Makes things a whole lot easier to explain. I didn't understand it
> initially, now I'm completely sold on the concept.

Agreed; this change converted me from a "git commit -a" user to a big fan of
the index.

- Josh Triplett