From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Jakma Subject: Re: seperate commits for objects already updated in index? Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:27:19 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: git list X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 14 18:39:08 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 1FJDJM-0006wN-1Y for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 18:27:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751402AbWCNR1x (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:27:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751459AbWCNR1x (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:27:53 -0500 Received: from hibernia.jakma.org ([212.17.55.49]:41600 "EHLO hibernia.jakma.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751402AbWCNR1w (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 12:27:52 -0500 Received: from sheen.jakma.org (IDENT:U2FsdGVkX19uTbXUBGX6VAkVt26FTSgukF/+2naanqw@sheen.jakma.org [212.17.55.53]) by hibernia.jakma.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2EHRJS9023639; Tue, 14 Mar 2006 17:27:31 GMT X-X-Sender: paul@sheen.jakma.org To: Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: Mail-Copies-To: paul@hibernia.jakma.org Mail-Followup-To: paul@hibernia.jakma.org X-NSA: al aqsar fluffy jihad cute musharef kittens jet-A1 ear avgas wax ammonium bad qran dog inshallah allah al-akbar martyr iraq hammas hisballah rabin ayatollah korea revolt pelvix mustard gas x-ray british airways washington peroxide cool X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88, clamav-milter version 0.87 on hibernia.jakma.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Well, I actually think git is being somewhat of an ass, for no > really good reason. It's true that you are doing something pretty > strange by _both_ using "git-update-index" and "git commit -o" but > the fact is, at least when adding files, that would be expected (ie > you have to mark a file in the index to add it). Well, I tend to work on one thing, then notice something else unrelated (or in a support file), fix/tweak that, etc.. I use the index for 'way-point' diffs, rather than commit things I havn't quite tested yet (or dont know whether they'll be useful yet). > I also think that test is historical, from before Junio cleaned up > how "git commit" worked - it _used_ to be that "git commit" would > work in the current index, but these days it generates a new index > to commit when you do "-o", so there's really no _technical_ reason > to refuse the partial commit any more as far as I can see. Aha. So that check possibly could just be removed? > So I don't know. I don't think you were being dumb, I think git > could have been friendlier to you. :) git reset works just fine too. regards, -- Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: A day for firm decisions!!!!! Or is it?