Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2007 at 04:18:57PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> What I meant was that if "git add -i" (unrestricted) shows paths >> from a set A, "git add -i paths..." should show paths from a >> subset of the set A and that subset should be defined with the >> existing ls-files pathspec semantics. > > Ah, I think that is definitely the right behavior. But it does raise one > more question: is going right into the 'add hunk' interface the correct > behavior, or is that an orthogonal issue? I am moderately negative about "paths imply jump to patch subcommand". An option to git-add--interactive that tells which subcommand to initially choose is probably acceptable, though. Would the patch I just sent out (you need to assemble the parts) make things easier? - 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
