Re: [PATCH 0/2] Making "git commit" to mean "git commit -a".

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Nov 29, 2006, 20:39 UTC
Message-ID: <7vlkluoulf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0611292059480.30004@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Steven Grimm wrote:
>
>> More likely they will start wondering the instant you tell them to use 
>> it the first time. Or at least they'll ask, "If '-a' means commit all 
>> files, what's the default?" And then you either have to blow off the 
>> question or start telling them about the index.
>
> So what? Tell them that there is a staging area, which makes many 
> operations of git very powerful and fast. And this staging area is called 
> "the index" in git. And to put some files into it, specify those 
> files. If you want _all_ modified files there, use "-a". That's it.

Well said.

I think I have stated my preference and reasoning clearly enough on this topic, so I won't waste my time repeating them. My time is better spent on _listening_ to people who might want to make convincing arguments to influence what I will end up deciding (the final decision will be mine anyway).

By the way, I've been having fun with the xdl_merge() stuff; thanks for a job well done. I will push some of it out in 'pu' shortly.