Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-add -a: add all files
- From
- Tarmigan <tarmigan+git@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jul 20, 2008, 04:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <905315640807192120k45b8c0e3k5b341e77c466dde@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vk5fhgrm6.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> People sometimes find that "git add -u && git add ." are 13 keystrokes too > many.
It's too bad that 'commit -a' and 'add -a' will have different meanings. Are add and commit considered porcelain enough that their short options could be changed? Probably not, but it would be nice to align 'commit -a' and 'add -a' or maybe 'commit -u' and 'add -u'. I can just hear people whining about inconsistent flags between subcommands with this change.
> The support of this has been very low priority for me personally, because > I almost never do "git add ." in an already populated directory, and if a > directory is not already populated, there is no point saying "git add -u" > at the same time.
Your reasoning for not using it (which is probably the case for most people), combined with the inconsistent short options makes me dislike the short option a little bit, but I like the long --add option.
Thanks, Tarmigan