Re: "git help stage" doesn't display git-stage man page
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Dec 3, 2008, 08:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vwsehfzf7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <87myfdn2ga.fsf@iki.fi>
Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> writes:
Show 12 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano (2008-12-02 22:23 -0800) wrote: > >> * The 'master' branch has these since the last announcement >> in addition to the above. > >> Scott Chacon (1): >> Add a built-in alias for 'stage' to the 'add' command > > I think there's a minor user-interface defect: > > $ git help stage > No manual entry for gitstage
The patch also breaks the promise made at 1.6.0 that prepending exec path to $PATH allows you to use the dashed form.
$ PATH=$(git --exec-path):$PATH
$ git-stage -p
xash: git-stage: cmd not found> "git stage" is only a built-in alias but at some point it may become the > primary staging command for new Git users and hence a kind of real Git > command. I think "git help stage" should show the git-stage manual page > (even though it only points to git-add(1)).
I do not think it would ever be _the_ primary command to add the contents to the index; we are adding it as a training wheel.
When we had the "staging area" discussion, somehow people ended up with this notion that you somehow *need to* use the same verb and noun. I.e. "the index is now explained as the _staging area_. Why isn't the command to add contents to the staging area called git-stage?" was the primary argument that lead to this thinking.
I do not think it adds much value to the system to be dogmatic and insist that you _have to_ use the same verb and noun. "You add your changes to the staging area" is a perfectly natural way to explain what you are doing and where the "add" in git-add command comes from. It however is Ok to allow people to use different spelling (i.e. the verb "stage").
In that sense, I think the intention of the patch to add "stage" as an additional verb, while clearly marking it as a synonym to the primary command "add", is aimed at the right place and strikes the right balance.
By the way, I think this should fix it, although it is very late and I have no time to test it tonight myself.
---
Makefile | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git i/Makefile w/Makefile index 9577d6f..5158197 100644 --- i/Makefile +++ w/Makefile @@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ BUILT_INS += git-merge-subtree$X BUILT_INS += git-peek-remote$X BUILT_INS += git-repo-config$X BUILT_INS += git-show$X +BUILT_INS += git-stage$X BUILT_INS += git-status$X BUILT_INS += git-whatchanged$X