2009/6/9 Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@xxxxxx>: > On 2009.06.09 11:59:08 -0700, Scott Chacon wrote: >> * adds 'git resolved' for 'git add', which I hear all the time as >> being confusing > > Is "resolve" a plain alias, like "stage", or smart in deciding which > files it accepts? My gut feeling is that a plain alias might cause > trouble again when users get lazy and start to do "git resolve ." and > wonder why that adds new files. In eg it's currently a plain alias, but I like your arguments for making it only handle unmerged entries. > Iff such a "resolve" command is added, it should IMHO only serve the > purpose of changing the status of index entries marked as "unstaged", > and do nothing else that "add" can do. When someone asks why "git add" > is used for telling git that a conflict was resolved, I can say that > "git add" means "add this to the things to be committed" and that that > implies that conflicts have been resolved (I like to describe "git add" > as "tell git that 'this is good to commit'"). So I can give some logical > explanation. But if someone would ask me why "git resolve" can add new > files, which never had a merge conflict, to the index, I'd be pretty > stumped. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html