Remove git commit #82

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

3 participants

@croaky
thoughtbot, inc. member
  • Most developers want to fiddle with the output of Suspenders before crafting their first commit. Weird to have to git commit --amend.
  • The git commit also makes it more difficult to run Suspenders as an upgrade path.
@croaky croaky Remove git commit
* Most developers want to fiddle with the output of Suspenders
  before crafting their first commit. Weird to have to git commit
  --amend.
* The git commit also makes it more difficult to run Suspenders
  as an upgrade path.
b6aa8cf
@mjankowski
thoughtbot, inc. member

I agree wholeheartedly.

A - always feels like a bit too much done for me when the initial commit gets made before I can review what was created
B - I like the side effect of easing the upgrade path

@gabebw
thoughtbot, inc. member

+1 from me too, for the same reasons mentioned above.

@croaky
thoughtbot, inc. member

Merged.

@croaky croaky closed this Jun 19, 2012
@mjankowski
thoughtbot, inc. member

The init_git step was left behind here, was that an oversight or intentional?

Leaving it in place causes the first suspenders usage to function as before, except instead of having an initialized repository AND a first commit of all the stuff we generate by default, you only have an initialized repo.

Running suspenders again (upgrade path) on an existing repo, produces output like...

Reinitialized existing Git repository in /Users/mjankowski/testapp/.git/

But as far as I can tell doesn't actually cause any damage to the repo

Removing the init_git would have the downside of leaving the user without an initialized repo, but the upside of never seeing that error.

@croaky
thoughtbot, inc. member

The init_git step was left behind here, was that an oversight or intentional?

Intentional. Was just doing the smallest thing to fix the known issue.

Leaving it in place causes the first suspenders usage to function as before, except instead of having an initialized repository AND a first commit of all the stuff we generate by default, you only have an initialized repo

I was thinking that'd still be desired behavior.

From the git init docs

Running git init in an existing repository is safe. It will not overwrite things that are already there. The primary reason for rerunning git init is to pick up newly added templates.

Sounds like sort of our use case. I say we leave it.

@mjankowski
thoughtbot, inc. member
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment