Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 09:58:52AM +0000, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 09:54, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > So? Your question was whether index state is precious. If it's precious, >> > shouldn't we be keeping a history of it? >> >> I don't think it's quite _that_ precious, but the only operation that >> I regularly use that can blow away my carefully constructed index as >> side effect of doing something else is `git commit -a`. > > OK, so how precious is it? :) The world is not that black-and-white, but is full of different shades of gray. If you made mistakes with a second "git add", you can "reset --mixed" everything away and restart from scratch. The same thing can be said for a mistaken "git commit -a" that can be "reset HEAD^" (or --amend). So there is not much difference at the technical level. I don't think this is primarily about "protecting the index". It is more about making the user feel better. Compared to a mistaken second "add", a mistaken "commit -a" feels like a lot heavier point-of-no-return. -- 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