From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:17:32 GMT
Subject: Re: most commonly used git commands?
Message-ID: <46a038f90706271917j7abb4bddu21debafe3461c695@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vodj41nm6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.pobox.com>

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.


m