Am 24.03.2013 18:38, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > I find this behavior very inconsistent and annoying. Why would I want > to commit the submodule change immediately? Maybe I want to batch it > up with other changes and stage it at a later time. Why should I have > to unstage them manually now? I get the other side of the argument: > what if the user commits the .gitmodule change at a different time > from the file change? In other words, the user should have a way of > saying 'submodule stage' and 'submodule unstage'. Hmm, AFAIK you are the first to bring up such a feature, as in most use cases doing a "git (submodule) add <path>" is expected to stage what you added. Maybe you could teach the stage/unstage code to also stage/unstage the corresponding part of the .gitmodules file, but I'm not sure it is worth the hassle. > Now, for the implementation. Do we have existing infrastructure to > stage a hunk non-interactively? (The ability to select a hunk to > stage/ unstage programmatically). If not, it might be quite a > non-trivial thing to write. Have fun when adding two submodules and unstage only one of them later. I think this feature will not work unless you analyze .gitmodules and stage/unstage section-wise. -- 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