From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:47:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] git rm -u
Message-ID: <7v621gxjjx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <vpqliac41zf.fsf@grenoble-inp.fr>

Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:

> Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> "git rm" really seems to be a better place for removing files from the
>>> index.
>>
>> Then, I don't exactly understand the meaning of git-rm but being a
>> _shortcut_ for "remove and stage".
>
> "git rm --cached" is exactly "remove from index".
>
> And even without --cached, as you notice yourself, it does a "remove and
> stage [removal]", so why would it be inappropriate to stage a removal?

I do not think "git rm" is a bad place to add the feature; I was
questioning if "-u" is an appropriate option.  The option "-u" given
to "git add" is internally called "take worktree changes", and we
would need the option to "git rm" with that internal meaning.  The
superficial meaning "updated" that "-u" in "add -u" stands for does
not really match what "git rm --take-worktree-changes" wants to do,
as we obviously do not want to remove all updated/modified files.