Ignoring any potentially flame-ish comments in the shared interest of factual discussion and eventual consensus followed by progress; please do the same :) On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 21:58, Thorsten Glaser <tg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This might be an alternative. RichiH, what are the requirements? The main use case from my/our POV is to track mtime etc to maintain relative and absolute differences which can be extremely useful for data even if it's not needed for code files. > I fear that the dotfile way will meet them better, considering > that they are versioned together, not separately, and what you > told me quickly about the idea. Points to consider: * In most cases I can think of, it would be preferable to track changes in metadata along with the actual files. * It should be possible for other repositories to ignore this metadata. * I am not sure if notes are suitable for this. Using notes.displayRef to hide those notes is an option, but it would force everyone to set this up locally. Else, it would be very spammy. * .gitattributes is too important to fill with potentially thousands of lines, imo. Using it to define what metadata should be stored would make sense, though. * would a .gitmetadata make sense for storage? Alternatively, a .git/objects/??/*.metadata per object could make sense. Thoughts? Richard -- 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