Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Make git-commit cleverer - have it figure out whether it needs -a automatically

From: Andy Parkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 15:17:59 +0000

On Friday 2006 December 01 13:07, Alex Riesen wrote:

> Of course it is. It's just that the problem is not solved yet,
> and if -a becomes git-commit's default a simple git-commit
> will be a real annoying thing.

There was talk of making git-commit -a; bear in mind that this patch was to 
completely sidestep making that default.  This patch has no effect on 
existing behaviour save for one special case: when commit would otherwise 
have done nothing, it now does "git-commit -a".

If you have a problem with git-commit -a, then presumably you are already 
using git-update-index for all your commit needs; in which case this patch 
has zero impact on you.

> > Wasn't the whole point of this to avoid needing another config option?
>
> was it it the point of breaking existing setups?

Of course it isn't; I have no intention of breaking yours or anybody else's 
setup.  However, as your complaint is that this patch highlights another bug, 
I would think the solution is fix the other bug, instead of botch around it 
in this patch.

Perhaps I was a little terse; what I should have said was - I don't really 
want to solve this executable bit problem with a config option; as that's 
papering over the cracks.  If executable bits are a problem, well why not 
detect when that's the case automatically.  I don't have a cygwin environment 
so I have no way to test what you ask for.

Andy

-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE