Re: [FAQ?] Rationale for git's way to manage the index

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: May 6, 2007, 16:51 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705061851411.4015@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <vpqwszm9bm9.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

Hi,

On Sun, 6 May 2007, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> [...]
>
> % git satus -a
> % git commit -a -m "..."
> 
> In the former case, I have more commands to type, and in the second
> case, I loose part of the stat-cache benefit: If I run "git status -a"
> twice, the second run will actually diff all the files touched since
> the last run, since "git status -a" actually updated a temporary
> index, and discarded it afterwards, so it doesn't update the stat
> information in the index (while "git status" would have).

Have you tried "git status" _without "-a"?

> In both cases, I can't really see the benefit.

The benefit is a clear distinguishing between DWIM and low level. The index contains _exactly_ what you told it to contain. By forcing users to use "-a" with "git commit", you make it clear that a separate update steo is involved, and if you made an error (which you see from the file list), you can abort, and start over with the original index.

Hth, Dscho