Re: [PATCH] commit: Steer new users toward "git commit -a" rather than update-index
From: Andy Whitcroft <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 20:17:56
Carl Worth wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
As has been discussed recently, update-index isn't intended as a "porcelain" command so the mention of it in the output of git-commit does lead to some user confusion. --- wt-status.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c index 7dd6857..4edabcd 100644 --- a/wt-status.c +++ b/wt-status.c@@ -126,7 +126,7 @@ static void wt_status_print_changed_cb(s int i; if (q->nr) wt_status_print_header("Changed but not updated", - "use git-update-index to mark for commit"); + "use \"git commit <files>\" to commit or \"git commit -a\" for all"); for (i = 0; i < q->nr; i++) wt_status_print_filepair(WT_STATUS_CHANGED, q->queue[i]); if (q->nr) --1.4.3.3.gf040
Are we sure this isn't porcelain-ish? We need to use it in merge conflict correction and the like? You can't use git-commit there as a replacement. I'd expect it to be 'git update-index' rather than 'git-update-index' of course.