Avery Pennarun wrote: > I generally just make a temporary commit > with "git commit", then revise it using "git commit --amend" over > time. > > Or else I make a series of commits, then *later* squash them all > together using 'git merge --squash' or 'git rebase -i'. > > It seems like the suggested feature would encourage people to do it > the "wrong" way (not creating temporary commits, thus making it easy > to make a mistake and blow things away) just because they aren't aware > of the above options. > > Is there a reason that these methods don't work for you? I like ‘git diff --cached’ and ‘git diff’ to show the entire list of staged and unstaged changes. I don’t consider this “wrong” at all. Generally, once something becomes precious enough to be worth keeping, it is already in presentable form and I can come up with an appropriate commit message. I understand that other people work differently; this is just my personal preference. I also use the stash heavily, which maybe mitigates the “content could be blown away with a simple rm -f” problem. You might also be interested in Pasky’s analysis at http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/138641/focus=138672 Cheers, Jonathan -- 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