Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 22:23:35 -0700 (PDT) Git User wrote: > Thanks again. > > It seems I didn't express myself clearly. OK, let me elaborate on > specific examples: [...] Sorry, have no time to read thoroughly at the moment -- will come back to it later and try to grasp. > If it's too cumberso

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

Thanks a lot everyone. Finally figured it out. I think that the following command sequence will do the trick: cp file file.unstaged git co file git commit file mv file.unstaged file I'll try to do a wrapper (`git-commit-staged' for example) and extend it on the case of multiple files. -- You

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

Usually, the whole index is committed as an indivisible unit. The trick of git commit is that it avoids using the index completely. It goes straight from work-tree (file) to repository (blob), as far as I can understand. From the docs of git commit :

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

Thanks again. It seems I didn't express myself clearly. OK, let me elaborate on specific examples: *Scenario 1:* *$ cat>a.txt * alpha *$ git add a.txt * *$ cat>>a.txt * beta *$ git st * # On branch master # Changes to be committed: # (use "git reset HEAD ..." to unstage) #

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 18:46:03 -0700 (PDT) Git User wrote: > Thanks to everyone. > Just one more thing: > If we could exclude that `git add file' part from `git commit file', > we would get the desired behavior, wouldn't we? > It seems to me like `git commit --staget file' is a subset of the > oper

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

Thanks to everyone. Just one more thing: If we could exclude that `git add file' part from `git commit file', we would get the desired behavior, wouldn't we? It seems to me like `git commit --staget file' is a subset of the operation `git commit file'. Or I'm wrong ? -- You received this messag

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

From: "Konstantin Khomoutov" To: Cc: "Git User" Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 2:40 PM Subject: Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Git User wrote: Thank you. Here is what I meant: echo alpha > a.txt add a.txt echo

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Git User wrote: > Thank you. > Here is what I meant: > echo alpha > a.txt > add a.txt > echo beta > b.txt > add b.txt > echo gamma >> b.txt > > Now I have a.txt and b.txt in staged state; and b.txt also has > unstaged changes. > I want to commit ONLY b.tx

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

Thank you. Here is what I meant: echo alpha > a.txt add a.txt echo beta > b.txt add b.txt echo gamma >> b.txt Now I have a.txt and b.txt in staged state; and b.txt also has unstaged changes. I want to commit ONLY b.txt (i.e. I want to commit only 'beta' and leave b.txt in modified state with 'be

Re: [git-users] Re: Documentation discrepancy

On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 18:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Git User wrote: [...] > One more question. > Is there an option to commit only specified files in their staged > state without doing `git add' on them ? There's a contradiction in your question: "the staged state" is the state of the files as recorded in t