demerphq <demerphq@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 7 January 2012 06:08, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > ... >> You are welcome to rehash the age old discussion, though. Personally I do >> not care very deeply either way. I would never use "commit --interactive" >> myself, and I would not encourage others to use it, either, even if we do >> not worry about the behaviour when a commit is aborted. > > If I were to provide a patch to make this behavior configurable would > you have any objections? You are welcome to rehash the discussion. I am not a dictator and will listen to other people on the list for their opinions, and I cannot say if such a patch will be accepted or not without seeing how well it is done. >> ... off to run "git add -i" to prepare the index, "git stash save -k" to check >> out what is to be committed (and stash away what are to be left out) so >> that you can make sure what you are committing is what you thought are >> committing (by asking "git diff" and "make test" for example), and after > > Isnt this what the diff option in commit interactive is for? Not at all. That is to help the user incrementally in the process and not a replacement for the final eyeballing of the result. Neither the patch shown in "commit -v", whose primary purpose is to aid the user to write a better log message. -- 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