On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 03:40:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Σταύρος Ντέντος <stdedos@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Would it make sense / be easy enough to have some clobbering check / flag? > > Given that use of '-o' to redirect to a fresh/new directory would > reduce the risk of such clobbering, and use of '-v' to force > different filenames would reduce the risk of such clobbering, > it seems to me that aborting the operation when we fail to open > the output, without any option to override and allow clobbering, > would make sense. If existing files record 4 patch series > 0001-x.patch, 0002-y.patch, 0003-z.patch, and 0004-w.patch, and you > generate with "format-patch --allow-clobbering" a three-patch series, > it would overwrite 0001 thru 0003 but will not remove 0004, so the > end result will still be confusing. I think a flag for this would be useful. For people that store tarballs (or pristine-tar files) and patches in their repository, overwriting the existing files is definitely desired. My personal preference is that the flag be --no-clobber, but I can see arguments for the other side as well. -- brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
