On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 10:37, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Eh, Sorry about that --- I did not mean "ignorant" in that sense. Perhaps > replacing the word with "unfortunate" would sound nicer? A lot yes. No harm done, apologies for picking the bad interpretation of ignorant. > Don't you realize that is what the hook is doing already? After making > such an error, the definitive information is lost, because the user told > the tool that the resolution is done and the file is ready to be > committed) by mistake. Even then the hook is trying its best to help the > user. You misunderstood me, there. I was thinking about the pre-add hook while writing the above. Doing anything at commit time is obviously wrong. > As to pre-add hook, I am not enthused, but if somebody sends in a clean > patch, I wouldn't be opposed to it at least in principle. An implicit need for it does apparently exist. Else, the default hook for pre-commit would not need to check for conflicts. Richard -- 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
