git-add --verbose should say when something is already indexed

git-add or at least git-add --verbose should say upon $ git-add bla.txt $ git-add bla.txt bla.txt is already in the index.

The git-add man page should mention how one can see all the files added, perhaps by git-ls-files. If so mention in SEE ALSO too.

Quoting jidanni@jidanni.org:

I do not think it should.

I suspect that you misunderstand what "git add" is. It is not about adding a new path to be tracked. Rather, it is to add the current contents of the file (unless --interactive is used).

You told git to add the contents of "bla.txt" to the index as path "bla.txt". I do not think there is anything more to report after it did exactly what it was told to do.

Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com> writes:

That is almost (say, 98%) true, but it is not absolutely outlandishly unreasonable if somebody wants:

    $ git add bla.txt
    $ edit bla.txt
    $ git add bla.txt

and

    $ git add bla.txt
    $ git add bla.txt

to behave differently.  The latter is a pure no-op.

Having said that, I do not think it is worth it. For one thing, if you did:

    $ git add .

after making changes to a few files and created one new file in a project with 20,000 files, command would say "Yo, bozo, you told me to add the same contents for path X" for 19,998 times.

If the report were not negative as Jidanni suggests, but instead were positive, i.e.

    $ git add -v frotz.txt nitfol.txt
    added new contents for frotz.txt
    added new contents for nitfol.txt
    $ edit frotz.txt
    $ git add -v frotz.txt nitfol.txt
    added new contents for frotz.txt

it might be slightly more useful, but I doubt it is that useful in practice.

I won't reject a patch if it is cleanly done, though.

DESCRIPTION
       This command adds the current content of new or modified files to the index, thus staging that content for
       inclusion in the next commit.

Maybe also mention that it also adds a new path to be tracked by the index, if it is not tracked already.