From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: non-empty index with git commit -a Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:51:14 -0500 Message-ID: <20110216085114.GA9413@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20110216023645.GA7085@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110216032047.GA2858@elie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Git List , Jakub Narebski To: Sverre Rabbelier X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 16 09:51:46 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ppd6v-0006kK-Do for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 09:51:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758416Ab1BPIvV (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:51:21 -0500 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:34725 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757400Ab1BPIvT (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:51:19 -0500 Received: (qmail 5969 invoked by uid 111); 16 Feb 2011 08:51:18 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Wed, 16 Feb 2011 08:51:18 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 16 Feb 2011 03:51:14 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:18:18AM +0000, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 03:20, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > If I remember the discussion[1] correctly, by requiring a separate > > add -u step (or commit -f -a) if the "I don't trust my fingers" > > configuration is enabled. > > That would definitely work for me. The question then is, should git > consider the index precious by default, or not? That is, should that > value default to true in 1.8? If we do not consider the index precious, then no, it should not be the default. If we do consider it precious, then isn't this option fixing one small case and leaving all of the others untouched? I can just as easily run "git add -u", or "git add -p" on top of some changes and then realize afterwards that I actually wanted the previous index state. The solution for that would be an index reflog. -Peff