Hi, On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Markus Heidelberg wrote: > Santi Béjar, 25.03.2009: > > 2009/3/25 Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>: > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:38:30PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > >> > > +If no message is given, "Initial commit" will be used. > > >> > > > >> > Why a default message and not running the editor? > > >> > > >> Because I would say "Initial commit" anyway. > > > > And I would say "Commit inicial". > > And I would describe the current state in a few words. > > Invoking an editor is more universal and I don't think the majority > would be contented with "Initial commit". _Again_, as Peff pointed out, you are welcome to use the current method of git init && git add . && git commit, which _does_ launch an editor. The fact that you want to spend much time (anyway) doing your initial commit does not allow you to inconvenience others. Others who want to have a quick way to work safely with something they might need to change, and might then want to use the full power of Git to see what they changed. Without any need for a "nice" first commit. Ciao, Dscho
