On Tue, 4 Jul 2023 at 14:56, Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This point I perfectly understand, but there's also this "ls" command
> that lists file names starting with 2023-* if required.
You know what? I'm done arguing with you.
Sure. I could also do "echo * | grep 2023" or something.
Or I could just remember every single mbx file I ever used.
Or maybe I could remember to just delete them immediately after using.
Or I could do any number of other things.
But what do you think "git status" is supposed to do?
Here's a theory - it's supposed to tell me about the status of my git tree.
Maybe it's supposed to tell me about extra files that maybe I should
be aware of. Maybe I should delete them. Maybe I should commit them.
Who knows?
Or maybe it's supposed to tell me that I've forgotten to push, or that
I have diffs I haven't committed.
All those things that are specific to having a git tree, that tools
like 'ls' simply don't know to do.
It's a crazy theory, I know. But just go with it, ok.
And *if* we pretend for a moment that this is what "git status" is
supposed to do, then maybe it should have reminded me about stale
random files in that directory that ACTIVELY BREAK MY WORKFLOW.
Maybe that isn't your workflow.
Maybe you're perfectly fine not getting a unique auto-complete,
because you *want* your git directory filled with irrelevant crap.
Or maybe you just always do "ls" religiously and look for random files
in general, because you are bored and it fills up that dead time.
But how about you just accept the fact that for some of us, the whole
point of 'git status" is to tell about these kinds of things, ok?
I'm now done. I have reverted that commit in my tree and pushed it
out, because while I was interested in hearing about any possible
other use for that overly aggressive gitignore entry, I'm not in the
least interested in you trying to teach me about esoteric tools like
'ls', or telling me that "unsuccessful auto-complete is still an
auto-complete".
Linus
