Marco <netuse@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I'm new to git and a bit confused about how some commands work. > > git add . -- Adds everything *but* deleted files > git add -A -- Adds everything > git commit -a -m "whatever" -- Commits everything *but* new files > > I don't understand why there's not switch (is there?) for commit to commit new > and deleted files, like -A for git add? Historical accident. In the early days of git, there was no .gitignore mechanism, so a mode that operates on everything under the working tree was almost always an undesired thing to have (think *.o files). Then .gitignore mechanism came, and "add ." has become usable. But "commit -a" has been widely used way before that. If you look at "commit -a" within that context, you would understand why it should only look at the paths git knows about. Of course, "add -A" is a much later invention. The option was named "-A" with capital letter, even though there is no "add -a". This was because I knew we would eventually want to have "commit -A" that grabs everything and new files (honoring the gitignore mechanism), and aimed for consistency between "add -A" that I was adding, and "commit -A" that was yet to be written. See 3ba1f11 (git-add --all: add all files, 2008-07-19). I think it now is sensible to add "commit -A" if somebody is inclined to do so. Nobody felt the need for it strongly enough to do so, it seems. -- 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