On Sun, 7 Sep 2008, Elijah Newren wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This is partial summary of Git User's Survey 2008 after more that 2000
(yes, that is more than _two thousands_ responses) just after the 6 days
of running the survey. It is based on "Analysis" page for this survey:
http://www.survs.com/shareResults?survey=M3PIVU72&rndm=OKJQ45LAG8
<snip>
git add + git commit | 65% (1012)
git commit -a | 63% (981)
<snip>
Analysis: strangely "git add + git commit" is slightly more used than
"git commit -a"; I would suspect that "git commit -a" would dominate a
bit over other forms of committing. What is for me more suprising is
that "git commit <file>..." has such large presence in often used
commands; I would think that it should be mostly used as 'sometimes'
command.
Does this data really compare usage of incremental staging of commits
vs. non-incremental all-changes-included commits?
You didn't have a git add + git commit -a, so if people feel like they
have brand new files to add to the repository often, adding new files
alone would cause them to mark the git add + git commit box as "often"
(or maybe I was the only one dumb enough to think this was
significantly related to adding new files?). That alone could account
for the difference, assuming others misunderstood as I did.
also, how many are doing 'git add .' or 'git add *' followed by git
commit?
there were several commands listed that I have never heard of before and
will want to research to see what they do to see if I should be using
them.
next survey it would be handy to have links from each command you are
asking about to a page that describes what it does and why you would use
it (_not_ just a link to the man page for git add in the example above)
David Lang
--
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
