Re: .gitignore, .gitattributes, .gitmodules, .gitprecious?, .gitacls? etc.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Sam Vilain wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >> Ok, but let's say for a moment that file properties are allowed, and 
> >> that they are stored in the Reiser4 fashion. On filesystems that did not 
> >> support this, it would be the only way to get at them - to go through 
> >> the index. Unless they were also mapped to regular files, or 
> >> filesystem-specific features somehow.
> > 
> > Happily, file properties as well hidden as these have _no_ _place_ in 
> > source code that needs to be tracked.
> 
> But you're restricting your statements to tidy, sane code bases.  Are
> there any particular reasons that git shouldn't be able to track insane
> code bases, with attributes etc?  It sure would shut up a whole load of
> people.

To the contrary.  People having those insane setups seem to be unable to 
admit it.  And I'm sure you saw some on this very list, like me.  They 
never shut up, they only get louder.

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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux