Re: EasyGit Integration

From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 9, 2009, 21:48 UTC
Message-ID: <51419b2c0906091448r1d45705he06f34bf9da1f797@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090609212748.GD13781@atjola.homenet>

2009/6/9 Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On 2009.06.09 11:59:08 -0700, Scott Chacon wrote:
>> * adds 'git resolved' for 'git add', which I hear all the time as
>> being confusing
>
> Is "resolve" a plain alias, like "stage", or smart in deciding which
> files it accepts? My gut feeling is that a plain alias might cause
> trouble again when users get lazy and start to do "git resolve ." and
> wonder why that adds new files.

In eg it's currently a plain alias, but I like your arguments for making it only handle unmerged entries.

Show 10 quoted lines

> Iff such a "resolve" command is added, it should IMHO only serve the
> purpose of changing the status of index entries marked as "unstaged",
> and do nothing else that "add" can do. When someone asks why "git add"
> is used for telling git that a conflict was resolved, I can say that
> "git add" means "add this to the things to be committed" and that that
> implies that conflicts have been resolved (I like to describe "git add"
> as "tell git that 'this is good to commit'"). So I can give some logical
> explanation. But if someone would ask me why "git resolve" can add new
> files, which never had a merge conflict, to the index, I'd be pretty
> stumped.