From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F053203EC for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934050AbcLMTMl (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:12:41 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:52121 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932912AbcLMTMk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:12:40 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A1B657493; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:12:38 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=NC9jRSFYNVoymKmgSY8bs8Sgk20=; b=qkz0as P7fUvXx0TxMqCMDGvWOWh+lmXc/BgCw8PF8DeFCcaSRNgqX/VZlZfBJfhsvdTZpA Ag26klfqFORidVG03SPnX5pmIg5fsuibdYEUwtv0y4YiuIuCNtS8Zr95mkmnIurY Fwre8PG+mppV0/oFzs9jXCTodnH31STvCcdzw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Dt/UGsJvGy3q076gEl2w7qI0m16KoZpU sQtlpnNsdLGOP2YvwIh8KjKJ7Lu84OzzU06lT2jkQEgIvERenZ5b8FUAK4a36tse nvSOtoRsgPAO9YftH4jzs6a0lALVXVylxlUF9fH9/k/kZKd+a6aGYgi1Wlffb4Yd RBG9cjCM3iI= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2189E57492; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:12:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 848DB57491; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:12:37 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Stephan Beyer , Ariel , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: git add -p with new file References: <20161209141129.r53b4rbtgd76fn2a@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161210085556.nwg3pbay367jqin5@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161211130034.ygj5l2gbx33uknlk@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161213173341.wemlunlixdp6277h@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161213185653.ys3ig377zhmblncl@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:12:36 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20161213185653.ys3ig377zhmblncl@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 13 Dec 2016 13:56:53 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 1C380FEE-C168-11E6-A4DE-B2917B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: >> Perhaps the latter is not advertised well enough? "add -p" does not >> even page so it is not very useful way to check what is being added >> if you are adding a new file (unless you are doing a toy example to >> add a 7-line file). > > I use "add -p" routinely for my final add-and-sanity-check,... > ... To me they are all tools in the toolbox, and I can pick the one that > works best in any given situation, or that I just feel like using that > day. Oh, there is no question about that. I was just pointing out that "add -p" is not the "one that works best" when dealing with a path that is not yet even in the index.