Hi, On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, V?in? J?rvel wrote: > On Aug 24, 2007, at 10:46, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > V?in? J?rvel? <v@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > The way I see the flag used is: A user runs "git status", sees that > > > there is too much untracked files and not enough scrollback, so he > > > runs "git status --only-tracked" to filter the results. > > > > Why? > > > > Just set up .gitignore once then (1) you do not have to worry > > about them ever again, and (2) you _will_ still be able to > > notice if you accidentally added more cruft, or more > > importantly, if you forgot to tell an important file to git. > > > > I think the latter is more important point. If you train a > > naive user to use --only-tracked to ignore "Untracked" list, you > > are doing him or her a great disservice. Mistake to forget "git > > add" a new file before commiting will bound to happen. > > I also think that maintaining a proper .gitignore is imporant, and more > productive than using --only-tracked instead. But when I have cruft that can't > be put in .gitignore, or it would ignore files that are supposed to be shown > and tracked, I use --only-tracked. Would it not be better to imitate the "-x" and "-X" options of ls-files, then? You could achieve the effect you desire by "git status -x \*" then. 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
