On 6/25/07, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Quoting Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>: >> Perhaps they are most commonly used by the person who came up >> with that list first ;-)? >> >> I think "add" deserves to be there, I am not sure "apply" is. > > git add is supposed to be rare, no? > That's why git commit lists file additions/removals ... No. You are talking in terms of pre-1.5 git. The semantics of "git add" has been clarified since then --- it adds contents, and is not about telling git that there are new files it did not know so far.
In other words - git-add is also a (semantically good) alias for git-update-index. So you "add" files to the next commit. Whether they are "new" to git or just changed it doesn't matter that much in that situation. And git-commit will look at those files that have been "added". Makes things a whole lot easier to explain. I didn't understand it initially, now I'm completely sold on the concept. m - 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
