On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 1:05 AM, Tait <git.git@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 1. When do you commit changes and when do you stage changes? Or maybe >> more to the point, what's the difference between doing "stage, commit, >> stage, commit" and "stage, stage, commit"? > > Staging changes is a prerequisite to committing them. With stage, commit, > stage, commit you will have two commits in history. With stage, stage, > commit you will have only one commit in history. What you stage (or > neglect to stage) is not part of recorded history in the repository. What > you commit, is. What's the difference, then, between doing "stage, stage, commit" as opposed to "stage, commit"? Why not just make all commits stage automatically? -- 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