public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox•net>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] git-add: add ignored files when asked explicitly.
Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2006 09:27:15 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vslf3khsc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612251443230.19693@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de> (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Mon, 25 Dec 2006 14:47:13 +0100 (CET)")

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx•de> writes:

> On Mon, 25 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>     $ git add foo.o
>>     $ git add '*.o'
>
> Most people do
>
> 	$ git add *.o
>
> instead, where bash expands the expression. Maybe this new behaviour 
> should be hidden between a "-f" option?

When would anybody do "git add *.o"?

A more plausible situation is that you have '*.o' in .gitignore
because you do not want to keep track of object files generated
from your source, but your project needs to keep track of one
third-party object file that you do not have the source to, and
helping that situation is what this patch is about.

An alternative is to use the mechanism I added here to _detect_
the attempt to add an ignored file with explicitly spelled out
pathspec, and issue an info message that says something like:

	Path 'xyzzy/filfre.o' is not being ignored by one of
	your .gitignore files.  If you really want to add it,
	please add this entry to .gitignore file:

        !/xyzzy/filfre.o

One advantage of this is that it would help guiding the user in
the right direction, giving a reusable piece of knowledge,
without changing the behaviour of the command (what is refused
is refused).  But I can already see people's complaints: if the
tool knows how to fix that situation why forces the user to do
so?

Although the reason why the alternative does not do so is "The
user earlier said *.o files are uninteresting but came back with
a conflicting request to add xyzzy/filfre.o, which could be a
mistake.  We ask for a confirmation", which is very sensible,
another alternative would be to add the path anyway and issue an
warning, like this:

	$ ls xyzzy
        filfre.c	filfre.o
	$ git add xyzzy/filfre.?
	added ignored path xyzzy/filfre.o

  reply	other threads:[~2006-12-25 17:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-12-25 11:13 [PATCH 5/5] git-add: add ignored files when asked explicitly Junio C Hamano
2006-12-25 13:47 ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-12-25 17:27   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2006-12-25 18:39     ` [PATCH] git-add: warn when adding an ignored file with an explicit request Junio C Hamano
2006-12-25 22:24       ` Jakub Narebski
2006-12-26 16:19         ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-12-25 19:57     ` [PATCH 5/5] git-add: add ignored files when asked explicitly Nicolas Pitre
2006-12-26 15:34     ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-12-26 19:05       ` Junio C Hamano
2006-12-26 22:48         ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-01-04 13:58     ` Andreas Ericsson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7vslf3khsc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net \
    --to=junkio@cox$(echo .)net \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx$(echo .)de \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox