Re: friendlier names

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 27, 2009, 19:50 UTC
Message-ID: <7vocxsy1dd.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <m37i4gy2z6.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> It is a bit of pity that "git add" was overloaded to also add new
> contents and not only add new file (and its contents!), instead of
> having new command "git stage" to be porcelain version of 
> "git update-index" porcelain.  And perhaps "git resolved" to only
> mark resolved entries (so e.g. "git resolved ." would not add new
> files, nor add new contents of files which were not in conflict).

I do not think so.

People who are taught with various means (including "git stage" alias) understand that you prepare the contents you want to record in the commit you are about to make by updating the contents registered in the index aka staging area, then you do not need "git resolved".

You resolve, you have the desired content in your work tree, and you register the updated contents from your work tree to the index aka staging area, in exactly the same way as you do when you want to include updated contents for any commit.