From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15)
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 14:00:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130418180017.GA5714@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vd2tr6833.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 10:51:12AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
> > +static const char *add_would_remove_warning = N_(
> > +/* indent for "warning: " */
> > + "In Git 2.0, 'git add <pathspec>...' will also update the\n"
> > +"index for paths removed from the working tree that match the given\n"
> > +"pathspec. If you want to 'add' only changed or newly created paths,\n"
> > +"say 'git add --no-all <pathspec>...' instead.\n");
> > +
> > static void warn_add_would_remove(const char *path)
> > {
> > - warning(_("In Git 2.0, 'git add <pathspec>...' will also update the\n"
> > - "index for paths removed from the working tree that match\n"
> > - "the given pathspec. If you want to 'add' only changed\n"
> > - "or newly created paths, say 'git add --no-all <pathspec>...'"
> > - " instead.\n\n"
> > - "'%s' would be removed from the index without --no-all."),
> > - path);
> > + static int warned_once;
> > + if (!warned_once++)
> > + warning(_(add_would_remove_warning));
> > + warning("did not stage removal of '%s'", path);
> > }
>
> Would "add --dry-run" say this, too?
It probably makes sense to continue to have the warning in the dry-run
case, but it may make sense to tweak it grammatically when we are in
dry-run mode. Saying "would stage removal" is technically correct, but I
think it is somewhat ambiguous: would git do it if we were not in a
--dry-run, or would git do it if it were Git 2.0?
Doing it as:
warning: not staging removal of '%s'
could work for both cases. Something like "not considering" (or another
synonym for "considering") might be even more accurate. It is not just
that we did not stage it; it is what we did not even consider it an item
for staging under the current rules.
Note that the "not staging" warnings may potentially be interspersed
with the normal dry-run output. I think that's OK. But another
alternative would be to collect the paths and then print:
warning: In Git 2.0, ...
The following deleted paths were not considered under the current
rule. Use "git add -A" to stage their removal now.
foo
bar
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-18 18:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-15 20:28 What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15) Junio C Hamano
2013-04-15 22:24 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-15 23:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-15 23:30 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-16 4:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-16 5:32 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-16 9:59 ` Thomas Rast
2013-04-16 19:04 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-16 19:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-16 19:48 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-16 22:34 ` Phil Hord
2013-04-16 23:50 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-16 22:45 ` Phil Hord
2013-04-17 4:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 18:50 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-17 23:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 3:59 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 7:44 ` Matthieu Moy
2013-04-18 9:15 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 9:19 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-04-18 9:53 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 10:27 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-04-18 10:55 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 11:31 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-04-18 12:05 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 11:46 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-04-18 12:16 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-23 18:49 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-04-23 19:11 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-18 20:06 ` Phil Hord
2013-04-18 23:48 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-19 21:07 ` Phil Hord
2013-04-20 1:29 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-04-15 23:25 ` Jeff King
2013-04-15 23:49 ` Øyvind A. Holm
2013-04-16 0:53 ` Jeff King
2013-04-16 0:30 ` Jeff King
2013-04-16 1:08 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-04-16 17:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-16 3:21 ` Drew Northup
2013-04-16 23:52 ` "What's cooking" between #05 and #06 Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 8:40 ` John Keeping
2013-04-17 15:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 21:25 ` Jens Lehmann
2013-04-18 8:49 ` John Keeping
2013-04-17 8:49 ` What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15) Lukas Fleischer
2013-04-17 15:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 9:47 ` Thomas Rast
2013-04-17 15:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 15:56 ` Thomas Rast
2013-04-17 17:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 18:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17 20:10 ` Jeff King
2013-04-18 1:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 1:47 ` [PATCH] git add <pathspec>... defaults to "-A" Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 17:27 ` What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15) Jeff King
2013-04-18 17:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 18:00 ` Jeff King [this message]
2013-04-18 18:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 20:30 ` Jeff King
2013-04-18 21:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-18 21:44 ` Jeff King
2013-04-18 22:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-19 4:14 ` Jeff King
2013-04-19 4:31 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-19 17:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-19 21:34 ` Jeff King
2013-04-19 21:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-21 7:39 ` jc/add-2.0-delete-default (Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2013, #05; Mon, 15)) Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-22 1:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-22 4:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-22 20:43 ` [PATCH 0/2] "git add -A/--no-all" finishing touches Junio C Hamano
2013-04-22 20:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] git add: --ignore-removal is a better named --no-all Junio C Hamano
2013-04-22 20:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] git add: rephrase -A/--no-all warning Junio C Hamano
2013-04-22 22:41 ` [PATCH 3/2] git add <pathspec>... defaults to "-A" Junio C Hamano
2013-04-23 0:42 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-04-25 23:06 ` [PATCH 0/2] "git add -A/--no-all" finishing touches Junio C Hamano
2013-04-25 23:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-25 23:24 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-25 23:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-25 23:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-25 23:56 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-26 0:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-26 20:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-26 21:30 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130418180017.GA5714@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=trast@inf.ethz.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).