On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > Are you sure? Does "--only" mean "only the changes I am about to mark" > or "only the paths I am about to tell you about"? Without partial hunk > selection (i.e., "commit -p"), they were the same; a path you mention is > a path which will be either be staged in its entirety or not. Specifying > (or omitting) the path was sufficient to say what you wanted. But with > "-p", I can see three useful possibilities: > > 1. Do not include F in the commit, even if changes are staged in the > index (i.e., take HEAD exactly). > > 2. Include F in the commit, and stage partial changes on top of what is > already staged. > > 3. Include F in the commit, and stage partial changes on top of HEAD. > > In cases 2 and 3, we are still taking "only the path" F. But we are > not taking "only what is about to be staged" in 2. And I can see both > being useful (2 because it is more convenient not to re-approve staged > changes, and 3 because there is no way to unstage changes via "-p").
I think I didn't consider 2. as a viable alternative because re-approving hunks is not a problem (there are typically very few hunks per file, and you'll recognise them if you've already staged them) but not being able to unstage is a big problem (as it restricts what commits I can make with --patch without changing my index). > > But of course we're not specifying paths. So to me it is "include the > changes I am about to stage via -p", as opposed to "--only use the > changes I am about to stage via -p". I think the current behavior is > morally equivalent to how --include works with paths (which includes the > paths along with the current index, rather than only committing the > paths). > > Or am I missing something about the distinction you're making? It seems > to me that the end behavior of thinking about it either way would be the > same. The way I was thinking about it was to treat the index and the command line as two orthogonal parts of the commit. --include and --only control the inclusion/exclusion of the index; while the command line arguments control which (currently unstaged) things are included. This led me to the conclusion that "git commit --include" is equivalent to "git commit", "git commit --include --all" is the same as "git commit --all" which is why I tried to change the validation logic. (You are correct that "--include --only" and "--interactive --all" still make no sense). Here's a re-roll of the patch with --only docs tweaked. Conrad ----8<---- Clarify that --interactive/--patch add to the existing index to avoid confusion like . Make explicit that --only does not work with --interactive/--patch and clean up wording around --only --amend.  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/207108 Signed-off-by: Conrad Irwin <conrad.ir...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/git-commit.txt | 35 +++++++++++++++++------------------ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-commit.txt b/Documentation/git-commit.txt index 9594ac8..680d2bf 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-commit.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-commit.txt @@ -41,9 +41,9 @@ The content to be added can be specified in several ways: actual commit; 5. by using the --interactive or --patch switches with the 'commit' command - to decide one by one which files or hunks should be part of the commit, - before finalizing the operation. See the ``Interactive Mode'' section of - linkgit:git-add to learn how to operate these modes. + to add files or hunks to the current index before committing. See the + ``Interactive Mode'' section of linkgit:git-add to learn how to + operate these modes. The `--dry-run` option can be used to obtain a summary of what is included by any of the above for the next @@ -63,10 +63,14 @@ OPTIONS -p:: --patch:: - Use the interactive patch selection interface to chose - which changes to commit. See linkgit:git-add for + Use the interactive patch selection interface to add hunks + to the index before committing. See linkgit:git-add for details. +--interactive:: + Use the ``Interactive mode'' of linkgit:git-add to edit + the index before committing. + -C <commit>:: --reuse-message=<commit>:: Take an existing commit object, and reuse the log message @@ -215,22 +219,17 @@ FROM UPSTREAM REBASE" section in linkgit:git-rebase.) -i:: --include:: - Before making a commit out of staged contents so far, - stage the contents of paths given on the command line - as well. This is usually not what you want unless you - are concluding a conflicted merge. + In addition to the paths specified on the command line, + include the current contents of the index in the commit. -o:: --only:: - Make a commit only from the paths specified on the - command line, disregarding any contents that have been - staged so far. This is the default mode of operation of - 'git commit' if any paths are given on the command line, - in which case this option can be omitted. - If this option is specified together with '--amend', then - no paths need to be specified, which can be used to amend - the last commit without committing changes that have - already been staged. + Only commit changes to the paths specified on the command line, + do not include the current contents of the index. This is + the default mode of operation when paths are specified. + If this option is specified with --amend it can be used + to reword the last commit without changing its contents. + This mode cannot be used with --patch or --interactive. -u[<mode>]:: --untracked-files[=<mode>]:: -- 22.214.171.1249.g0ce9864 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html