Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Also, you probably want to give all the error before you "exit 1", >> hence stg like: > > Hm, is that a good idea? We want the output to be functional and > indicative: it should tell the user what to do immediately. Yes, but I find this very painfull when you $ git do-something error: you need X before you can do-something $ do X $ git do-something error: Ah, you also need Y before you can do-something > I'm afraid that displaying both errors will make the output very > verbose. We can just tell the user about the unstaged changes, and > wait for them to commit or stash it. Either way, both commit and > stash will affect the index by default :) A plain commit will get rid of staged changes, not of unstaged ones. Your patch shows unstaged changes first. If the only problem was unstaged changes, then "git stash --keep-index" would be a good solution. As a user, I prefer knowing both problems to find the right solution (and avoid trying to solve only unstaged changes before noticing I need to solve the other one too). -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/ -- 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