3 ms·
90% of VCS commits are simple enough to not need staging in my experience. That you can stage your changes does not mean that you need to be forced to do that.
by gmueckl 9y ago
90% of VCS commits are simple enough to not need staging in my experience. That you can stage your changes does not mean that you need to be forced to do that. This is the point the article tries to make: streamline the workflow, but do not remove the feature for power users (people like you).
- OJFord 9y agoI believe there's a flag to `commit` that effectively does `add .` first. I disagree with your statistic though - I can't tell you what the flag is precisely because it's almost never what I want; so I never use it and haven't learnt it. I think these things just vary with workflow.
- mrich 9y agoJust for completeness sake, the command to do that would be git commit -a It does an implicit git add -u (which does not add new files not yet part of the repo)
- gmueckl 9y agoSo you disagree based on your personal experience? That is fine. I base my observation on what the people around me were using in various environments, so I am actually fairly confident that this can be generalized. This is the best I can do unless someone makes some representative statistics over a broad user base.
- qznc 9y agoI record my uses of each command and the current counts are the following (g is my shell alias for git): 161 g cap # commit --patch --amend 170 g adu # add -u 205 g add -p # add --patch 277 g ci # commit -a 484 g cip # commit --patch At least, I use it a lot. ;)