On 2007-10-20 13:15:19 +0200, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
> I think the issue here is that git-mv as it is currently implemented
> really conflates two things:
>
> 1. Renaming a file in the traditional "mv" sense
> 2. Staging the entire contents of the file in the index, ready or not
>
> So it's kind of like the command were called git-mv-and-add or git-
> rename-and-add. And given that the index as a staging area is such a
> central content in Git, users often want to have more control over
> what gets added to the index than that; ie. "I really just wanted to
> rename the file, and leave the staging of modifications to the
> content up to me".
I've come to that conclusion too while reading this thread. It would
make more sense for git-mv to, as others have already suggested, move
the file in the worktree and move the file in the index but _not_ add
workdir updates to the index. git-mv --cached would do only the index,
and not touch the worktree.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
-
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
