From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Carl Worth Subject: Re: [RFC] Two conceptually distinct commit commands Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 18:36:48 -0800 Message-ID: <87vekr1327.wl%cworth@cworth.org> References: <87d56z32e1.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <87bqmj2zit.wl%cworth@cworth.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Dec__4_18:36:48_2006-1"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 02:37:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/21.4 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GrQBX-0004i2-H2 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2006 03:37:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968038AbWLECh3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Dec 2006 21:37:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S937319AbWLECh3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Dec 2006 21:37:29 -0500 Received: from cworth.org ([217.160.249.188]:58201 "EHLO theworths.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S937298AbWLECh1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Dec 2006 21:37:27 -0500 Received: (qmail 28859 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2006 21:37:26 -0500 Received: from localhost (HELO raht.cworth.org) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 4 Dec 2006 21:37:26 -0500 To: Jakub Narebski Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org --pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Dec__4_18:36:48_2006-1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 22:19:55 +0100, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Or even new option to git-apply, namely --index-only, which would apply > patch to index only. Wouldn't that leave me in a state where my working-tree would be all set for reverting the patch? Can you imagine a scenario where that would actually be useful? -Carl --pgp-sign-Multipart_Mon_Dec__4_18:36:48_2006-1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBFdNtA6JDdNq8qSWgRAoMgAJ4ldwoVBbowAmYl+XocSZVb8vy77ACfTzMF SRZcKmdoux3yxZ10ZYlJDOE= =xW1r -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----