Re: [PATCH 0/2] Making "git commit" to mean "git commit -a".

Linus Torvalds wrote:

At least for me, it turns out that the only mode I _never_ use personally 
is the "git commit -i" thing, which was actually the original behaviour, 
and which you'd think that I would encourage for that reason. But no. Of 
all the modes of "git commit", that's the one I think is the least 
important, and least interesting.

Of course, during a merge, you do need "-i" if you list files, but I think 
"-a" subsumes almost all cases (you _can_ use "-i file-list" or totally 
manually decide to have some extra edits you did that you don't want to 
commit together with the merge, but that's such a special case that I 
doubt anybody does it, so I don't think it's a big deal).

Anyway, we have "-i", and we don't force anybody to use it, so the fact 
that it's a bit odd and not that useful doesn't really matter. It 
certainly "fits" in the git commit family as another case, it's just not 
one of the important cases.

So, in short, -i is easier to explain, but is also least used. Perhaps
also because one can simply update index with <files> before git commit
instead of doing "git commit -i <files>".
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git