Re: [PATCH 01/10] Better "Changed but not updated" message in git-status

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Well, I was aiming for the same.  It is not the "files" but the changes
that matter, but what we list are files.

Not only. We also list "pairs of files" in the case of a rename, and
list symlinks (which are technically files on unix, but not
necessarily seen as such by all users).

quoted

I second that. Furthermore, keeping it short increase the changes that
user will actually read the message.

You could do s/Files with/With/ to shorten them.  Or perhaps

    Changes to be committed are in:
        new file: foo.c
    Changes that will be left out are in:
        modified: foo.c

I don't like the wording, and it would be worse in the case of
renames :

Changes to be commited are in:
   renamed: foo -> bar

Anyway, I don't think we have a problem to solve here. While the
"changed but not updated" was really confusing, I didn't see complains
about the "Changes to be committed", and I really think this one is
fine as it is.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/