Subject: Re: Why doesn't git commit -a track new files

From: Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:04:17 +0100

Matthieu Moy venit, vidit, dixit 24.02.2011 17:04:
> Michael J Gruber <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
>> Why does it not exist? Because you should at least
>> "git add -A && git status && behappy && git commit".
> 
> There are alternatives like
> 
> git status && behappy && git commit -A

That may not give the full picture of untracked stuff in subdirs.

> or
> 
> git commit -A && look at status $EDITOR && behapy && save

Yes, I even mentioned that, but you cut it. Bad bad boy! ;)

>> Also, "-A" supports a very "un-gitty" way of using git. This makes it
>> unlikely that someone cares to implement it...
> 
> I guess that's it. It's not usefull to most Git developers, hence nobody
> cared to implement it. But IIRC the switch "add -A" was chosen partly
> because -A didn't exist for commit, hence this leaves room for commit

Yes.

So, we have one more volunteer for the plan just laid out, right?

Michael