On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 12:28:47PM -0500, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > It would be wrong to do "commit -a" in submodules if the supermodule > weren't being committed with -a, of course. What if you say "git commit submodule" ? I sure hope you wouldn't want to do a "commit -a" in the submodule. One of the nice features of git is that you can still perform most operations if you have a dirty state and I would very much want to be able to commit only some changes in the submodule and then only commit that change in submodule commits in the supermodule without having my other changes in the submodule committed as well. If you agree with the above, then why should "git commit -a" do any different from "git commit submodule" if submodule was the only thing that got changed ? skimo - 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