Re: [PATCH RFC] commit: allow to commit even if there are intent-to-add entries

> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> When running "commit" and "status" with files marked with "intent to add",
>>> I think there are three possible interpretations of what the user
>>> wants to do.
>> [ (1) thanks for stopping me, I had forgotten about that file;
>>   (2) I changed my mind, please leave that file out; or (3) please
>>   dwim and add the file ]
>>
>> I think (3) was a trick --- no one that does not use the "-a" option
>> would want that. :)
>
> I really wish it were the case, but I doubt it.
>
> People from other VCS background seem to still think that "commit" without
> paths should commit everything; after getting told that "what you add to
> the index is what you will commit", I can easily see this commint: but but
> but I told Git that I _want_ to add with -N! Why aren't you committing it?

>> (2) makes intent-to-add entries just like any other tracked index
>> entry with some un-added content.
>
> You are comparing files edited in the working tree without the user
> telling anything about them to Git (both tracked and untracked) and files
> the user explicitly told Git that the user hasn't made up her mind
> about. Why is it a good thing to make the latter behave "just like any
> other"?