# Re: [PATCH] Enter interactive mode if no parameters are given to git-add 4 messages from 2006-12-19 to 2006-12-19. Participants: Jakub Narebski, Junio C Hamano, Linus Torvalds, Andy Parkins. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/43249 ## Andy Parkins, 2006-12-19 15:16 Subject: [PATCH] Enter interactive mode if no parameters are given to git-add Message-ID: <200612191516.09606.andyparkins@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200612191516.09606.andyparkins%40gmail.com ``` git-add with no parameters previously adds every modified file. This patch instead makes git-add enter interactive mode. Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins --- This patch is against pu. It seemed a bit nasty to add content without explicit instructions to do so. Instead, just drop into interactive mode, which they can easily get out of if it was all a big accident, and additionally is quicker than typing --interactive. builtin-add.c | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin-add.c b/builtin-add.c index aa2f0f3..52a63a0 100644 --- a/builtin-add.c +++ b/builtin-add.c @@ -96,10 +96,12 @@ int cmd_add(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) if (!strcmp("--interactive", argv[i])) add_interactive++; } + if (argc == 1) + add_interactive++; if (add_interactive) { const char *args[] = { "add--interactive", NULL }; - if (add_interactive != 1 || argc != 2) + if (add_interactive != 1 || argc > 2) die("add --interactive does not take any parameters"); execv_git_cmd(args); exit(1); -- 1.4.4.2.g95ee-dirty ``` ## Jakub Narebski, 2006-12-19 16:42 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enter interactive mode if no parameters are given to git-add Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/em94l8%24n8u%241%40sea.gmane.org In-Reply-To: <200612191516.09606.andyparkins@gmail.com> ``` Andy Parkins wrote: > gmane.comp.version-control.git > git-add with no parameters previously adds every modified file.  This > patch instead makes git-add enter interactive mode. > > Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins > --- > This patch is against pu. > > It seemed a bit nasty to add content without explicit instructions to do > so.  Instead, just drop into interactive mode, which they can easily get out > of if it was all a big accident, and additionally is quicker than typing > --interactive. Hmmm... --interactive is not documented, and neither is --all (erm, I think git add -all oatch was not yet added). -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2006-12-19 18:00 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enter interactive mode if no parameters are given to git-add Message-ID: <7vy7p3pxyr.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/7vy7p3pxyr.fsf%40assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net In-Reply-To: <200612191516.09606.andyparkins@gmail.com> ``` Andy Parkins writes: > git-add with no parameters previously adds every modified file. This > patch instead makes git-add enter interactive mode. > ... > It seemed a bit nasty to add content without explicit instructions to do > so. Does anybody rely on the current behaviour? It is nasty and I consider it a bug. It appears that it has been like that since the days when it was still a shell script. While I think nobody should drive 'git add' from script, the behaviour to add everything when there is no explicit parameter (or fall back to interactive for that matter) has a problem if you say "some command | xargs git-add --" (you need "xargs -r" to fix it, which is GNU). Let's first have a patch to exit with a warning message (but status 0) without doing anything when there is no explicit paths. Again, does anybody rely on the current behaviour? ``` ## Linus Torvalds, 2006-12-19 19:04 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enter interactive mode if no parameters are given to git-add Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.64.0612191101490.3483%40woody.osdl.org In-Reply-To: <7vy7p3pxyr.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> ``` On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Andy Parkins writes: > > > git-add with no parameters previously adds every modified file. This > > patch instead makes git-add enter interactive mode. > > ... > > It seemed a bit nasty to add content without explicit instructions to do > > so. > > Does anybody rely on the current behaviour? I don't know about "rely", but yes, it's what I normally do. When I import a tar-ball, I'll just do ..untar.. cd result-x.y.z git init-db git add git commit and I don't usually use the "." at all, since it's unnecessary. But hey, if it enters some interactive mode, maybe I can teach myself to either just do "git add .", or if the interactive mode has a choice of "a" for "all", then why not? > While I think nobody should drive 'git add' from script, the > behaviour to add everything when there is no explicit parameter > (or fall back to interactive for that matter) has a problem if > you say "some command | xargs git-add --" (you need "xargs -r" > to fix it, which is GNU). That's a really good argument against the current behaviour of "git add", so while I actually use it without any parameters, I will concur that we should probably change it. ```