What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 128 Stack Exchange communities.

I just had a question on stackoverflow closed as not constructive. I'm interested in why it was deemed as not constructive. I was asking why a seemingly obvious flag had not been included in Git's commit command as I was certain that there must have been a good reason, but was interested in what that was. In most of the cases I have seen a question closed, the reason was obvious, but I can't see how this was an unconstructive question.

I'm not asking for it to be reopened, just interested in why it was closed.

share|improve this question
I've opened the question again based on edits, it's now more than objective enough. –  Tim Post Nov 24 '12 at 0:44

1 Answer 1

The question Why doesn't git offer git commit -A -m "Add whatever" is rhetorical. It cannot be answered by anyone who is not a developer for Git.

What you are really doing is stating git should offer git commit -A -m "Add whatever"

That said, you do seem to have an accepted answer, so at least you got what you were looking for.


In light of the comments below, I believe your question could benefit from restructuring to the effect of:

Is there a specific reason that feature X has been deliberately omitted in Git? The reason I am assuming it was deliberately excluded is XYZ.

Note that answering this question would still rely heavily on informed guesswork from people who have no more insight into the reasoning behind this decision than you do.

share|improve this answer
That doesn't follow at all. If I asked 'Why can't I carry more than 100ml of any liquid onto a commercial flight departing UK airports?' There is a valid answer to that question - That information gathered by intelligence services showed a detailed plot to carry liquid explosive onto commercial flights leaving the UK for the US and Canada. The question is not rhetorical in the slightest. Are you saying that a question as to why something is a certain way is more valid than why something isn't? –  1ndivisible Nov 23 '12 at 23:20
@1ndivisible Yes, because there are any number of features that aren't present in any given system. The example you have provided is not analogous because it is the opposite, it is asking why a certain restriction exists, instead of why a certain restriction doesn't. If you mean to imply that Git deliberately omits feature X then I have misunderstood your original question. –  Asad Nov 23 '12 at 23:24
It's hard to talk about without getting into a technical discussion, but yes, that is effectively what I'm asking. Having an '-A' flag would seem like an obvious addition, so its omission is clearly deliberate. –  1ndivisible Nov 23 '12 at 23:30
@1ndivisible I suspect that others might have had the same misunderstanding as I have. Nonetheless, this is still a hard question to answer unless you are privy to the design choices behind Git. I don't feel it deserves summarily being closed though, now that I understand it better. –  Asad Nov 23 '12 at 23:37
Thanks. I've rephrased the question in light of your comments, not that anyone will be able to answer it now. –  1ndivisible Nov 23 '12 at 23:46
The restructuring that you've proposed essentially makes it off-topic. We're not historians/bug-trackers/feature-request takers, and this isn't a practical, answerable problem. Ask Linus. –  casperOne Nov 24 '12 at 2:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .