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

From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@imag.fr>
Date: May 10, 2007, 08:00 UTC
Message-ID: <vpq1whp5cqt.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.98.0705091934440.4062@woody.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

> Yeah, I don't think "git add -i" is a horrible flow - it just shouldn't be 
> the only or the primary one (ie apparently it *is* the primary one for 
> darcs, and that's a mistake!)

Note that darcs has a way to test before commit even for partial commits. It re-creates your working tree, hardlinking unmodified files, and runs a command there as a precommit hook.

I still prefer the old good "you commit what's in the tree, and run whatever you want before commit", but their approach seems interesting also in this case.

-- 
Matthieu

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.