On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 11:07 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Overall this looks good, but there's just one part that confuses me. > > Here you seem to suggest that if you pass --source but neither --index > > or --worktree that both the index and working tree will be written to. > > Why are "restored" changes considered ready for commit? That seems > > confusing to me (and was one of the bugs of checkout, IMO). See also > > second half of https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqq1s6yezk3.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > As long as worktree-only mode does not lose track of a > previously-untracked path in the index (perhaps use the i-t-a bit), > I do not have a strong objection against making the worktree-only > mode the default. Could you unpack that for me a bit? My assumption is that worktree-only mode doesn't touch the index (other than maybe reading from it), and treating the index as read-only means by definition it can't lose anything from there -- but then you mentioned using the intent-to-add bit, and I feel like I'm missing an important puzzle piece somewhere. Trying to make sense of it, I'm wondering if you are objecting to using overlay mode in general, or are trying to connect this to the new "precious" concept being advanced, or if there's something else you are considering here.
