Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force"

[Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>]

Hi Pavel,

On 13/01/06, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:
> Maybe I don't understand something in StGIT, but it seems strange that
> "stg new" creates empty patch by default and requires "--force" to
> create a non-empty patch.

The 'new' command would fail to create a new patch if there are
changes in the tree.

I also find myself using the '--force' option most of the time. Even
when I create a an empty patch, I use to run 'status' before. The
current implementation is closer to Quilt where, AFAIK, you first
create a new patch and use 'add' for every modified file. Since 'add'
has a different meaning in StGIT, it might also make sense to remove
the '--force' option.

> 1) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new" and "stg new" becomes "stg new
> --empty", i.e. empty files can only be created with the "--empty"
> switch.
> 2) "stg new --force" becomes "stg record" or something.
> 3) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new --record" or something.
> 4) "stg new" works both with and without modified files.

Regarding (1), the newly created patch is empty anyway, you would need
to run 'refresh' to add the modified patches to it ('stg series -e'
would show the empty patches prefixed with a 0).

Anyway, I would also prefer option 4. If there are no objections, I'll
modify StGIT accordingly. It would also be useful to have a wiki page
about StGIT vs. Quilt to show the main differences.

--
Catalin