@Jeff: Thank you for the clarification. I didn't want to appear pushy, I
just wanted to make sure that I did everything right and that my mail
won't get ignored/filtered because of some breach of protocol.
@Junio, Duy: Thanks for starting/proposing work on this!
thanks,
Christoph
On 06/02/2012 12:33 PM, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Junio C Hamano<gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jeff King<peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
No, I don't think anybody is working on it at the moment (at least I
do not see anything near the time of that old discussion, nor do I
recall it being discussed since).
+cc Clemens, in case he had any work-in-progress as a result that did
not end up getting published.
I think the way the codepath for -i feeds path to excluded() is wrong.
The excluded() interface relies on the fact that the caller has
already checked foo/ before calling it for foo/bar; when asked to
see if "foo/bar" is excluded, it does not consider if "foo/" is
excluded---the caller should have already checked it.
Sparse checkout deals with the exact same problem and it reconstructs
a tree structure from cache list, before feeding to excluded(). I
thought of generalizing it (e.g. for this case), but with v5 in
progress, we'll probably have tree-based index soon. "ls-files -i"
could be fixed by then.
--
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