On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 12:23:47AM +0200, Karl Hasselström wrote: > On 2007-05-10 22:02:53 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > Yes, I fear that StGIT hides the index in a similar way that Cogito > > does. It seems like user index usage is undergoing kind of > > renaissance these days in Git community (at least it seems to me > > this way, maybe it's always been this way), it would probably make > > sense to allow making use of index in StGIT as well. > > I agree. It's bad UI for StGIT to behave different from git, given > that easy interoperation is a goal. Well, that's an idea that already appeared in some discussions - I can't speak for Catalin, but I too think it could be a good thing. Eg, if we're going to use the patchlogs a bit more (and I wish so), it will be much less cluttered by using the index to select what to commit with several git-add's, than when using several stg-refresh's. As noted elsewhere, there are some commands that are a bit superfluous (add, rm, and the branch-switching feature directly come to mind). It is especially annoying, eg when "stg rm" behaves differently than "git rm", by not removing the real file. I have tried recently to avoid using "git add" and "stg rm", and I am quite pleased with that :) > > And yes, it would be cool if stg new could guess patch name from the > > subject line in a similar manner that stg uncommit does. > > Good idea. This would be embarrassingly easy to do. > > But you can kind of do it today. Just commit with git (my favorite > here is the emacs modes) and "stg assimilate"! Well, that's arguably a non-orthodox way of doing things, I like the idea your "stg new" patch much better :) Best regards, -- Yann. - 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
