From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Voigt Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] optionally disable overwriting of ignored files Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:44:11 +0200 Message-ID: <20100831184410.GA29001@book.hvoigt.net> References: <4C6A1C5B.4030304@workspacewhiz.com> <7viq39avay.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20100818233900.GA27531@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Clemens Buchacher , Junio C Hamano , Joshua Jensen , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Matthieu Moy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 31 20:44:21 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OqVoj-0005vn-5P for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:44:21 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751969Ab0HaSoO (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:44:14 -0400 Received: from darksea.de ([83.133.111.250]:36925 "HELO darksea.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750720Ab0HaSoN (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:44:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 12656 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2010 20:44:11 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO localhost) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 31 Aug 2010 20:44:11 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:33:21AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Clemens Buchacher writes: > > > By default, checkout and fast-forward merge will overwrite ignored > > files. Make this behavior configurable. > > I'd use this option if it gets into git.git. > > I didn't follow the discussions when the feature was added, and I was > basically not aware that Git could trash my ignored files this way. > I've always thought that Git took great care not to touch untracked > files, and I found this good ... I agree here. I would like to have this as an option as well. And I think adding a "ignored but precious" category does not make sense in practise. My guess is that a user would only know _after_ git trashed some precious file that it belongs into that category;) I have told my users that git is very careful with their files and I would like to keep this promise. I was actually never annoyed by a failed checkout because of an untracked file in the way. (A 'git clean -fx' always fixes this). Thanks. Heiko