Thanks for the clarifications. Just a quick comment about the summary: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yeah, I had the same thought. So you would have to either: > > 1. Hook the feature into git-archive, which knows about how it > recurses, and can report the correct set of paths. > > or > > 2. Tell check-attr (or some post-processor) to apply the attribute to > elements below the path (or possibly to prune out such paths). This > is not the same as recursive application, because you cannot negate > it (i.e., you actually find out the final attrs for both "foo" and > "foo/bar", and then say "the attr for 'foo' overrides the attr for > 'foo/bar'". > > I posted a patch for (1), but it felt not-very-general. But (2) also > feels gross and not very general. Even though it could in theory be used > for things besides git-archive, it is really just applying git-archive's > pruning rule, which other programs likely don't care about. I actually think the first approach is not such a bad idea, it would make "archive" more of a general-purpose archiving tool/helper for the repository rather than just something for the special cases of tars and zips. But I guess that's somewhat subjective. Cheers, Jan -- 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