Hi, you left enough hints to convince me that you will not fix the bugs. So I will bite the bullet, and find some time this week to fix the issues. Junio, I'd really appreciated if you considered waiting with 1.5.3 (maybe do an -rc2?) before these bugs are squashed. On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Matthias Lederhofer wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > In practice, and I consider these all bugs, it does not work: > > > > - you have to say > > > > $ git --work-tree=$HOME --bare init > > > > which is a bit counterintuitive. After all, it is _not_ a bare > > repository. The whole purpose of worktree, as far as I understand, is > > to have a _detached_ repository, which would otherwise be called bare. > > Use > > $ git --work-tree "$HOME" --git-dir . init > > instead. Why _should_ that be necessary at all? I _already_ told git that the working tree is somewhere else. It makes _no sense at all_ to treat the cwd as anything else than the GIT_DIR, when --work-tree but no --git-dir were specified. > IMHO the --bare flag did not make much sense before the introduction > of GIT_WORK_TREE and doesn't after, at least not with the meaning it > has: why should 'git --bare' mean to use the repository from cwd? To the contrary, it makes tons of sense. If you want to initialise a bare repository, what _more_ natural way than to say "git init --bare"? And what _more_ natural place to pick for GIT_DIR than the cwd, when you did not specify --git-dir? > > [descriptions of bugs, that have been largely ignored] > > Up to now you are supposed to be in the working tree all the time when > using it. Therefore I'd call these feature requests rather than bugs :) Feature requests? WTF? What reason is there for the _requirement_ to specify a working tree, when git does not make use of it? Hmm? 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
