On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 08:23:19AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Clemens Buchacher <drizzd@xxxxxx> writes: > > > On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 02:32:44PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > >> I think it has already been proposed to introduce "git add -a" doing > >> what "git add -u" do, but for the full tree. > > > > I like that, actually. AFAICT it's completely analogous to "git commit -a". > > We also need something for "git add -A" though. > > > > Do you feel the same way about changing the behavior of "git grep"? I don't > > really want to change the command's name. > > I don't have particular feeling about "git grep", probably because I > don't use it much. One argument in favour of keeping the current > behavior is the consistancy with plain "grep". I'm not sure how important should be the consistency with plain grep in this case. After all, plain grep does not work without pathspec at all (ok, it searches stdin, but it's completely different thing), while git grep does. And plain grep is not recursive by default, while git grep is. And plain 'grep -r foo .' searches all files in the current directory and below, while 'git grep foo .' does not search in untracked files. Regards, Gábor -- 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