> If cvs commit is what you were used to, then I’m sure staging and pushing changes would strike you as a pointless chore. But using only `cvs commit` would be

> If cvs commit is what you were used to, then I’m sure staging and pushing changes would strike you as a pointless chore. But using only `cvs commit` would be the equivalent of using a single script with git that adds every single thing in the relevant dirs and then blindly commits it. In other words, the people coming from cvs and svn and complaining that git added a step for them were either doing an impeccable job of keeping their source dirs clean at all times, or they were implicitly admitting that they weren't keeping track of what they were adding to their own repos. I would guess there are old projects that fit the latter description. But I know from experience there are old projects that clearly fit the latter.