Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
I am expecting a reaction more like "Hmm, I never thought about it
before. Does that make sense to me or not? Let me think about which
paths it pertains to and decide".
Let's step back and re-review the main text.
It currently says:
In Git 2.0, 'git add <pathspec>...' will also update the
index for paths removed from the working tree that match
the given pathspec. If you want to 'add' only changed
or newly created paths, say 'git add --no-all <pathspec>...'
instead.
This was written for the old "we may want to warn" logic that did
not even check if we would be omitting a removal. The new logic
will show the text _only_ when the difference matters, we have an
opportunity to tighten it a lot, for example:
You ran 'git add' with neither '-A (--all)' or '--no-all', whose
behaviour will change in Git 2.0 with respect to paths you
removed from your working tree.
* 'git add --no-all <pathspec>', which is the current default,
ignores paths you removed from your working tree.
* 'git add --all <pathspec>' will let you also record the
removals.
The removed paths (e.g. '%s') are ignored with this version of Git.
Run 'git status' to remind yourself what paths you have removed
from your working tree.
or something?
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 03:10:29PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I am expecting a reaction more like "Hmm, I never thought about it
before. Does that make sense to me or not? Let me think about which
paths it pertains to and decide".
Let's step back and re-review the main text.
Good idea. I was very caught up in the existing message and what it made
me expect, and not in what we are trying to accomplish overall.
It currently says:
In Git 2.0, 'git add <pathspec>...' will also update the
index for paths removed from the working tree that match
the given pathspec. If you want to 'add' only changed
or newly created paths, say 'git add --no-all <pathspec>...'
instead.
This was written for the old "we may want to warn" logic that did
not even check if we would be omitting a removal. The new logic
will show the text _only_ when the difference matters, we have an
opportunity to tighten it a lot, for example:
You ran 'git add' with neither '-A (--all)' or '--no-all', whose
behaviour will change in Git 2.0 with respect to paths you
removed from your working tree.
* 'git add --no-all <pathspec>', which is the current default,
ignores paths you removed from your working tree.
* 'git add --all <pathspec>' will let you also record the
removals.
The removed paths (e.g. '%s') are ignored with this version of Git.
Run 'git status' to remind yourself what paths you have removed
from your working tree.
or something?
Yes, I like that much better. It reads more clearly than the original,
and it is more obvious why we are mentioning the path at all.
And I think the hint of "git status" is good. I had considered before
that the user would simply run "git status" after the message to get
more data, but I didn't want to rely on them knowing to do that.
Actually mentioning it is a good solution. :)
Thanks for pointing us in the right direction.
-Peff