Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ryan Phillips <rphillips@g.o>
To: Ryan Phillips <rphillips@g.o>, gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: ferdy@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:53:05
Message-Id: 20060428214918.GA65225@watcher.kimaker.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union by "Fernando J. Pereda"
1 "Fernando J. Pereda" <ferdy@g.o> said:
2 > Ryan:
3 >
4 > I think you are talking about very old versions of Git:
5 >
6 > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 02:20:43PM -0700, Ryan Phillips wrote:
7 > > What I meant is, if you have a change within one directory pending
8 > > a commit, and you have a commit pending in a current directory, both
9 > > files will be picked up for the commit. I think that is bad. That
10 > > means you can't have pending changes not ready for commit and commit
11 > > something.
12 >
13 > Of course you can have pending commits. You can even have uncommited
14 > changes in your index since git-commit uses a temporary index when doing
15 > this kind of checkins.
16 >
17 > > yes. git-commit will allow the commit, it will walk the directories
18 > > backwards, but it will find all the pending changes and want to commit
19 > > them.
20 >
21 > It will if you don't use git-commit correctly :)
22 >
23 > > I don't think that is beneficial. I'm open to comments though.
24 >
25 > 'git commit' semantics are a bit different from 'cvs commit' and 'svn
26 > commit' semantics. That's probably the reason you faced that problem :)
27 >
28
29 the only option I saw was git-commit -o and you had to specify the
30 files that you wanted to commit.
31
32 I tried doing a git-commit paths/ and still everything wants to be
33 committed.
34
35 It isn't pretty.
36
37 -Ryan

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo: State of the Union "Fernando J. Pereda" <ferdy@g.o>