Re: [RFC] git rm -u

From: Antoine Pelisse <apelisse@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 25, 2013, 18:54 UTC
Message-ID: <CALWbr2x9=+PEaGTpGWoqGiiupGsPhLoPcGknPb1WtSgxdpBkdQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vzjys28a0.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

I must say that I'm not very interested in the feature. In my opinion, there are already many different ways to stage changes. Assuming that the feature would be needed, I would keep it under the scope of git-add, as it's the reference for staging. I would suggest something like:

    git add -r   "Stage removal of deleted files."

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 27 quoted lines

> Eric James Michael Ritz <lobbyjones@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 01/19/2013 04:49 PM, Antoine Pelisse wrote:
>>> I think `git add -u` would be closer. It would stage removal of
>>> files, but would not stage untracked files.  It would stage other
>>> type of changes though.
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Tomas Carnecky
>>> Does `git add -A` do what you want?
>>
>> Thank you Tomas and Antoine.  Both of these commands do what I want:
>> stage deleted files on the index.  But does the idea of a `git rm -u`
>> still sound useful since these commands also stage changes besides
>> deleted files?
>
> Even though I am not sure how often I would use it myself, "reflect
> only the removals in the working tree to the index, but exclude any
> other kind of changes" might turn out to be a useful addition to the
> toolchest in certain cases.
>
> I however am not yet convinced that "git rm -u" is a good way to
> express the feature at the UI.  "git add -u" is "update the index
> with modification and removal but ignore new files because we won't
> know if they are garbage or assets".  What the same "-u" option
> means in the context of "git rm" is not very clear, at least to me.
>
>