Re: Message from git reset: confusing?

Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> writes:

You meant "git reset".

First a tangent.

Removing this output _when no <path> is given_ would greatly reduce the usability of the command.

I often find myself working on something that consists of more than one steps, and initially I decide that these would form, say, two commits A, and B. I first start adding the changes that are relevant to A, and my index gradually gets closer to what A should finally look like.

But then I realize that logically commit B should come before commit A, and it is time to "git reset" without any <path>s. The output would let me review the changes (this includes changes pertaining to both A and B) to help me recall which files would contain changes that are relevant to B.

I agree that "git reset a-single-exact-filename" could be much more silent. I would even say we do not even need -v in such a case.

But the thing is, that is a very narrow special case. The parameter the command takes is not _a file_, but is a set of pathspecs, and I would imagine that when you are in a situation similar to what I just described in a larger project, you would appreciate the same reminder of modified paths when you run the command like this:

    $ git reset include/ arch/x86/

I wouldn't oppose to a patch that squelches the output when all pathspecs given from the command line _exactly_ name existing paths, but I tend to think that it would be usability regression if you do not show any output in a case like the last example.