On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:25:46AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> You ran 'git add' with neither '-A (--all)' or '--no-all', whose
> >> behaviour will change in Git 2.0 with respect to paths you
> >> removed from your working tree.
> >>
> >> * 'git add --no-all <pathspec>', which is the current default,
> >> ignores paths you removed from your working tree.
> >>
> >> * 'git add --all <pathspec>' will let you also record the
> >> removals.
> >>
> >> The removed paths (e.g. '%s') are ignored with this version of Git.
> >> Run 'git status' to remind yourself what paths you have removed
> >> from your working tree.
> >>
> >> or something?
> >
> > That looks good. :)
>
> I think the direction may be good but the above is too tall to be
> the final version. of the message. Somebody good at phrasing needs
> to trim it down without losing the essense.
Hmph. I actually like it as it is. It says:
1. Here's what triggered this warning (removed paths without -A).
2. Here is how you tell git what you want to do (--all/--no-all)
3. Here is how you get more information about what you wanted to do
(mention one such path, point to "git status").
I would not want to cut out any of those three. You could perhaps cut
out the bullet points in the middle, which reduces (2), but the user may
be able to figure it out from the first sentence. However, I like the
explicitness of those bullet points (and I prefer them to a wall of text
which is more daunting to read).
-Peff
--
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