Explanation of snapshotting (git add, git commit) arrives too early

[bast]

We discuss advantages of two-steps snapshotting before we even started to git init and record anything. I think we should start using it and clarify later.

[rkdarst]

Can the whole detailed description of the staging area be left until the dedicated section on it? I think it's not necessary to go into details at the beginning, let's just pretend it is svn-like.

option 1: Not much actually changes, just teach add + commit in sequence without going deep into it. Some explanations can be simplified and the sequence of commands can be hand-waved until later. It would be OK to say "we are staging these for commit and we will talk about this later".

option 2: go all in and don't use git add in first parts (except to track files), use git commit to make commits. Explanations get simpler most of the time, as long as you don't do get in weird states. Usage seems more streamlined. Then present the extra use of git add in the section on staging. We are teaching slightly worse practices at the beginning, but make it simpler. Also git sort of assumes that people use the staging area, and it is hard to fully hide it.

I think option 1 is best because it's the least change, least surprise, etc.

[bast]

I also tend towards 1. Perhaps show an easy to understand small benefit early and definitely postpone diving into more details and more benefits to later.

[bast]

I believe this is now solved. There is a mini explanation but all the rest has moved to later.