git commit -a is not the way to do it. Why not do this instead?
git add .
git commit
"git add." will commit all changes. You can specify individual directories or files. For example if I have changes in the src and plugins directories I can do "git add src" and only the changes in the src directory are staged. Then when I do "git commit" those staged changes are committed.
The purpose of "git commit -a" is to save you a step so you don't have to do the "git add" command.
The problem is when they purposely remove content from a finished game to make it DLC that is available on the game's release date or a week or two later. Release a side story or a new map via DLC is great and I support that but don't remove core functionality or story just to sell it back to me.
Slashdot Mirror
git commit -a is not the way to do it. Why not do this instead? git add . git commit "git add ." will commit all changes. You can specify individual directories or files. For example if I have changes in the src and plugins directories I can do "git add src" and only the changes in the src directory are staged. Then when I do "git commit" those staged changes are committed.
The purpose of "git commit -a" is to save you a step so you don't have to do the "git add" command.
The problem is when they purposely remove content from a finished game to make it DLC that is available on the game's release date or a week or two later. Release a side story or a new map via DLC is great and I support that but don't remove core functionality or story just to sell it back to me.