Re: [Census] So who uses git?

From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Feb 1, 2006, 22:25 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602011717010.5397@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <7v8xsu91vf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> To recap:
> 
>  - "git commit fileA..." means: update index at listed paths
>    (add/remove if necessary) and then commit the tree described
>    in index (the same as the current behaviour with explicit
>    paths).

No.

>  - "git commit -a" means: update index with all local changes and
>    then commit the tree described in index (the same as the
>    current behaviour).

Sensible.

>  - "git commit" means: write out the current index and commit
>    (the same as the current behaviour).

Sensible.

Show 8 quoted lines

>  - "git commit --only fileA..." means: create a temporary index
>    from the current HEAD commit (or empty index if there is
>    none), update it at listed paths (add/remove if necessary)
>    and commit the resulting tree.  Also update the real index at
>    the listed paths (add/remove if necessary).  In the original
>    index file, the paths listed must be either empty or match
>    exactly the HEAD commit -- otherwise we error out (Linus'
>    suggestion).

Actually, my opinion is that should be the behavior for your first item above (when only filenames are specified). If you want to _also_ include the index like you describe in your first item then an additional switch should be provided.

In other words, the --only should become --with-index with the behavior swapped.

The fact is that when you simply specify a filename, you really expect _only_ that filename will be affected and the rest be left alone. That's the most probable expectation for any tool. If you want _additional_ stuff to also be merged along with the files specified then it is logical to have an additional argument in that case, not the other way around.

Nicolas