Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> 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
-
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