Re: git-ls-files --added?

[Constantine Plotnikov <constantine.plotnikov@gmail.com>]

On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com> writes:
>> ...
>>> I am still interested in the rationale for git-ls-files not supporting
>>> such an option directly, since git-diff still seems a little indirect.
>>
>> Partly historical, but more fundamental reason is because ls-files
>> plumbing is about the index.
>> ...
>> Added is _not_ about comparision between the index and the work tree.  It
>> is between the HEAD commit and the index, and it does not belong to
>> ls-files plumbing.
>
> Having said all that, I think you might be interested in pursuing
>
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/97830/focus=99134
>
> Also, the following thread may serve as a food for thought; it shows that
> there is real need for some concise, easy to parse output for people who
> want their own Porcelain.
>
>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/106122/focus=108110
>
> In short, ls-files and diff-index _can_ give you what you want, but often
> people would want information from both, consolidated.

I'm one of those people :) Writing git support for IDEs is quite
tricky at times, and status check was one of quite unpleasant
experiences.

BTW git-diff won't work in situation when the directory was just
initialized and there were no commit. In that case added file = staged
file and it is possible to use git-ls-files.

Constantine