Re: Git terminology: remote, add, track, stage, etc.

On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 10:44 +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:

On 10/18/2010 11:57 PM, Jakub Narebski wrote:

quoted

Well, there is different suggestion: make `git stage`, `git track` and
`git mark-resolved` to be *specializations* of `git add`, with added
safety checks: 'git stage' would work only on files known to git /
under version control already, 'git track' would work only on
untracked files (and do what 'git add -N' does), and 'git mark-resolved'
would work only on files which were part of a merge conflict.

I think that is a great idea.  The thing that I found most confusing
when learning git is that variations on a single command often have very
different effects.  

Ok, so what will "git stage" do when a change of a file is already
staged and it is executed again (on new changes)? The point of "git add"
is that it is adding the current state to the index, not that it is
adding a file to version control (in contrast to most other VCS/SCM).
Adding a "git stage" that acts as if "git add" permanently adds a file
to version control merely confuses this issue in my opinion.

(Comments about checkout will come in another message, granted I come up
with the time to write them down...)

-- 
-Drew Northup
________________________________________________
"As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
-John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59