Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
>> > I recommend against that, too. All too often, I have some temporary files
>> > in the working tree, and I'll be dimmed if I'm the only one. So
>> > "addremove" adds too much possibility for pilot errors.
>>
>> "Recommend against it"? Why?
>
> Didn't I say that? It just _asks_ for pilot errors.
Huh? How is it any worse than the underlying commands it uses
("git add ." in particular)?! Indeed, it seems rather less likely to
cause problems, because it has a rather odd name.
>> It's a separate command, so if it doesn't fit your working style, don't
>> use it.
>
> Hah! If that were true, we'd have a lot less mails like "I tried this and
> it did not work", only to find out that the person assumed that
> documentation is for wimps, and tried a command that "sounded" like it
> would do the right thing.
Git is not exactly a user-coddling, ultra-hand-holding application, nor
does it seem to have that as a goal. It offers _tons_ of rope to hang
yourself if you wish (though it usually offers lots of ways to recover).
Rather git seems to have as a goal being a useful toolkit for managing
source trees, and based on what I've seen, tries to accomodate many
different styles of usage (rather than trying to force a certain style
down the users' throats -- as some VCSs try to do ...).
-miles
--
/\ /\
(^.^)
(")")
*This is the cute kitty virus, please copy this into your sig so it can spread.
-
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
