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

[Sergio Callegari <scallegari@arces.unibo.it>]

David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:

> 
> Sergio Callegari <scallegari <at> arces.unibo.it> writes:
> 
> > Couldn't all this directory/ownership/permission tracing be easily
> > done by using hooks?  E.g. Having a pre-status and pre-commit hook
> > one could fire up a program/script to collect all the extra info he
> > wants to trace and store it somewhere (typically in some traced
> > file).  The other way round one could have a post-checkout hook and
> > he could arrange it to fire up some program to look into the
> > extra-info file to set up all the meta-data he wants.
> >
> > This would be very flexible and would permit to manage absolutely
> > /any/ kind of the metadata leaving absolute freedom about how to do
> > so.
> >
> > Am I missing something here?
> 
> Merging.
> 

Sorry, maybe I am really missing something, since merging does not look to me
as an issue.

Why cannot git simply do the merging in the working tree as it normally
does, including merging of the traced metadata file generated by the metadata
helpers invoked via the hooks?
Only, again more hooks are needed and likely a post-merge hook, so that at
the end of the merge, the metadata can be applied.

Only, to have things going on smoothly, one should be so wise to assure that
the metadata helpers save metadata as nice, sorted text files in order to
minimize the burden of manual intervention if there are conflicts in
metadata merging.

BTW.  Having a post-checkout hook could also help getting rid of unwanted
empty directories, couldn't it?
 
Sergio