From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force" Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 08:18:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1137144291.20073.104.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: git , Charles Lever X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 16 09:18:23 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 1EyPZE-0006hF-Do for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:18:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750932AbWAPISJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2006 03:18:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932230AbWAPISJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2006 03:18:09 -0500 Received: from xproxy.gmail.com ([66.249.82.205]:32299 "EHLO xproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750932AbWAPISH convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2006 03:18:07 -0500 Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id i30so858605wxd for ; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:18:07 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=isH5g0a0qNloY9QoMiy1K/71RsDYOiZps6tuS93uPx76vTDAvemlii/aH9T7jD49e3yFCZ+vXD8zBPUNjOQIhR+dpj7Q8zJ4ufsRjVTTpCBZR6MZPU4V0MX+y5dBbHP8AaOtlsr3/oYBH87tsiKCI7gyEM9TMm5O0y6BOQMTKbQ= Received: by 10.70.71.4 with SMTP id t4mr5100861wxa; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:18:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.53.11 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:18:07 -0800 (PST) To: Pavel Roskin In-Reply-To: <1137144291.20073.104.camel@dv> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Pavel, On 13/01/06, Pavel Roskin 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