"Fernando J. Pereda" <ferdy@gentoo.org> 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