Hi, On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 12:01:01AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Why not just tell these users to setup the working directories with > > > local .git directories and not use GIT_DIR? > > > > suggest that we might want to bite the bullet and declare that > > these things are not supported anymore in v1.5.0. > > While we're talking about potentially deprecating GIT_DIR for users, > out of curiosity, what valid workflows would cause users to want to > use GIT_INDEX_FILE and GIT_OBJECT_DIRECTORY? Seems like they would > cause more confusion and support problems than anything else. Easy, guys. It is a valid -- indeed, useful -- thing to be able to script nice helpers. For example, in one project I track tar balls. So, I wrote a script which will unpack the tar ball in a directory, build a new index from it, and commit the corresponding tree on top of the tracking branch. This setup relies _heavily_ on being able to redirect GIT_INDEX_FILE and GIT_DIR. So, these things are _useful_. Please don't break them. As for the presence of "index" in a bare repo: I think this is not a problem, _as long_ as things continue to work as before, i.e. $ GIT_DIR=$(pwd) git log and $ git --bare log do _not_ complain if "index" is there. Now, if somebody starts git in a bare repo, where "index" is present, it could die with a helpful message like It seems that this is a bare git repository, but there is an index file present, which contradicts that assumption. If the repository is indeed bare, please remove the index file. Ciao, Dscho - 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