From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Roskin Subject: Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force" Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:01:40 -0500 Message-ID: <1137517300.20556.26.camel@dv> References: <1137144291.20073.104.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git , Charles Lever X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 17 18:04:00 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EyuDk-00060x-Ui for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:02:13 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932200AbWAQRBr (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:01:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932199AbWAQRBr (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:01:47 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]:44959 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932200AbWAQRBq (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:01:46 -0500 Received: from proski by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1EyuAV-0006BT-2Y for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 11:58:51 -0500 Received: from proski by dv.roinet.com with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1EyuDE-0008Pu-Du; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 12:01:40 -0500 To: Catalin Marinas In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.5.4 (2.5.4-6) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hello, Catalin! On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 08:18 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 13/01/06, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > 1) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new" and "stg new" becomes "stg new > > --empty", i.e. empty files can only be created with the "--empty" > > switch. > > 2) "stg new --force" becomes "stg record" or something. > > 3) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new --record" or something. > > 4) "stg new" works both with and without modified files. > > Regarding (1), the newly created patch is empty anyway, you would need > to run 'refresh' to add the modified patches to it ('stg series -e' > would show the empty patches prefixed with a 0). I was going to suggest that would be logical to run "stg refresh" implicitly if "stg new" is used on modified files. But then I realized that it would be even better if future versions of StGIT allowed to refresh (i.e. add changes to) patches other that the current one. In this case, indeed, you don't want the newly created patch to suck in all the changes in the local repository. > Anyway, I would also prefer option 4. If there are no objections, I'll > modify StGIT accordingly. It would also be useful to have a wiki page > about StGIT vs. Quilt to show the main differences. That would be great! I'm trying to make StGIT my primary development tool, and I think it has a great potential the could be realized if StGIT is freed from the need to emulate older tools. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin