El 20/10/2007, a las 7:55, Ari Entlich escribió:
I'm thinking of occasions where you just want to do something
like:
git mv --cached foo bar
git add --interactive bar
I think it would be the other way around, since the only time this
change would effect anything is when there are changes still
waiting to
be staged.
Well, my point was that sometimes you want to rename a dirty file
*right now* without having your modifications staged in the index
yet, and only later go ahead and stage the hunks (or the whole file)
when they're ready.
Basically, without this feature you have to manually unstage the
stuff that you don't want staged:
[hack on dirty foo]
git mv foo bar
[oops... you just staged unfinished changes]
git reset HEAD bar
[hack until bar is ready]
git add bar
So in order to unstage the stuff that wasn't ready you unstaged the
whole file and had to re-add it later, in which case what was the
point of using "git-mv" in the first place? You may as well have just
done:
[hack on dirty foo]
mv foo bar
[hack until bar is ready]
git rm foo
git add bar
The other alternative is to use git-stash:
[hack on dirty foo]
git stash
git mv foo bar
git stash apply
[hack until bar is ready]
git add bar
So, yes, you can do this with git-stash. It just means that "git-mv --
cached" would be a convenient short-cut.
Are you talking about REALLY only changing the index?
No, sorry, I didn't make that clear. I meant that "git mv --cached
foo bar" would have the following effect (which if I understand it
correctly is basically what you proposed in your first email):
1. Copying "foo" directly to "bar" (even if dirty).
2. When adding "bar" to the the index add the blob corresponding to
"foo" as it is staged in the index (or at the HEAD if there are no
staged changes).
3. Removing the old file "foo".
The actual mechanics of this don't matter; those are just the
perceived effects. You could get exactly the same perceived effects
by doing it this way:
1. Creating a new file (or overwriting an existing one) named "bar",
whose contents would match those of the file "foo" not as it appears
in the working tree but as it is staged in the index.
2. If "foo" has unstaged changes, they should be applied to "bar" as
well (but not staged).
3. Removing the old file "foo".
In addition, I don't think giving
--interactive a filename is meaningful...
Whoops. I think I just inadvertently proposed a feature... my most
common use of "git-add --interactive" is when I want to stage only
specific hunks of a particular file, and so instead of typing "git
add bar" I want to type "git add -i bar" and have it jump straight to
the "patch" subcommand (5) for that file. Would anyone else find this
useful?
Cheers,
Wincent
-
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
