> Are we talking about two different issues here? > > Am 11.08.2010 14:24, schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason: >> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 07:03, Greg Brockman <gdb@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Currently, 'git add' will complain about excluded files, even if they >>> are already tracked: > > I'm all for not complaining when adding an ignored file that is > already tracked, as the user already told us he wants to track > this file despite .gitignore. > >>> ... so it feels natural to me not >>> to require extra user confirmation when an explicit path has been provided. >> >> I like it. I keep a /etc in git with .gitignore "*". This would help a >> lot for use cases like that. Explicitly specifying a full path should >> override gitignore IMO. > > I'm not so sure if we should silently add ignored files just because > they appear on the command line. For me having to force the first time > I do a "git add" for an otherwise ignored file looks like a feature. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read Ævar's use to be exactly the one I described. In particular, he presumably has a few interesting files in /etc that he tracks but wants to ignore the rest. So as far as I can tell we are all talking about the same issue. To be clear, I certainly agree that having to force the first time you run 'git add' is a feature, and my patch explicitly does not change this functionality. Anyway, modulo further discussion, I will add some tests and send the revised version to the list. Thanks all for looking this over. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html