From: Junio C Hamano Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2006 22:24:11 GMT Subject: Re: 2 questions/nits about commit and config Message-ID: <7vhd7evk38.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <7voe1mvkls.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Junio C Hamano writes: > An example of such semantic change would be: if I am in > subdirecotry foo/, commit changes to files in that subdirectory > and subdirectory alone. But that is actively _encouraging_ > partial commits (commits that records a state that never existed > in your working tree as a whole) so I personally am not so > enthused to buy such a _feature_. Before people start complaining about it, I take this part back. "git commit -a" inside a subdirectory "foo" is not much different from "git commit foo/a foo/b foo/c" from the toplevel directory to explicitly say "Don't worry about what I told the index so far; I want to check in changes only to these paths", and making a partial commit out of the current HEAD and the specified working tree files using a temporary index (while updating the main index at the same time), so I am inclined to say we should support it that way, since during the previous discussion we have pretty much settled how we would want "git commit paths..." and "git commit --include paths..." commands to behave.