"Fernando J. Pereda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Ryan: > > I think you are talking about very old versions of Git: > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 02:20:43PM -0700, Ryan Phillips wrote: > > What I meant is, if you have a change within one directory pending > > a commit, and you have a commit pending in a current directory, both > > files will be picked up for the commit. I think that is bad. That > > means you can't have pending changes not ready for commit and commit > > something. > > Of course you can have pending commits. You can even have uncommited > changes in your index since git-commit uses a temporary index when doing > this kind of checkins. > > > yes. git-commit will allow the commit, it will walk the directories > > backwards, but it will find all the pending changes and want to commit > > them. > > It will if you don't use git-commit correctly :) > > > I don't think that is beneficial. I'm open to comments though. > > 'git commit' semantics are a bit different from 'cvs commit' and 'svn > commit' semantics. That's probably the reason you faced that problem :) >
the only option I saw was git-commit -o and you had to specify the files that you wanted to commit. I tried doing a git-commit paths/ and still everything wants to be committed. It isn't pretty. -Ryan
pgpYAOsjE8CQ3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
