On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 10:30 AM Per Lundberg <per.lundberg@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/13/18 1:22 AM, brian m. carlson wrote: > > This is going to totally hose automation. My last job had files which > > might move from tracked to untracked (a file that had become generated), > > and long-running CI and build systems would need to be able to check out > > one status and switch to the other. Your proposed change will prevent > > those systems from working, whereas they previously did. > > > > I agree that your proposal would have been a better design originally, > > but breaking the way automated systems currently work is probably going > > to be a dealbreaker. > > How about something like this: > > 1. Introduce a concept with "garbage" files, which git is "permitted to > delete" without prompting. > > 2. Retain the current default, i.e. "ignored files are garbage" for now, > making the new behavior _opt in_ to avoid breaking automated > systems/existing scripts for anyone. Put the setting for this behind a > new core.* config flag. > > 3. In the plan for version 3.0 (a new major version where some breakage > can be tolerable, according to Semantic Versioning), change the default > so that "only explicit garbage is garbage". Include very clear notices > of this in the release notes. The config flag is retained, but its > default changes from true->false or vice versa. People who dislike the > new behavior can easily change back to the 2.x semantics. How does this garbage thing interact with "git clean -x"? My interpretation of this flag/attribute is that at version 3.0 by default all ignored files are _not_ garbage, so "git clean -x" should not remove any of them. Which is weird because most of ignored files are like *.o that should be removed. I also need to mark "precious" on untracked or even tracked files (*). Not sure how this "garbage" attribute interacts with that. (*) I was hoping I could get the idea [1] implemented in somewhat good shape before presenting here. But I'm a bit slow on that front. So yeah this "precious" on untracked/tracked thingy may be even irrelevant if the patch series will be rejected. [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CACsJy8C3rOFv0kQeJrWufQQzbnfU4mSxJtphEYBGMmrroFFN-A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > Would this be a reasonable compromise for everybody? -- Duy
