From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03231F4B4 for ; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 23:59:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728442AbgIHX7Y (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:59:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:64955 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726605AbgIHX7X (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:59:23 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0C483FC0; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:59:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=oe8RDV5u4Cuqx/TZND9gf8qC7Pw=; b=p4An7m 4q3M4FpDZFWo+bvv43gEwgOpjPmKN/mUovJ0nXUQtmIUib6WWCsNXgm5rKWFhGn8 LCXYYkmbqicIDs2l09xWZhD4weFncEEQgvemxRS2/9zy+OP/O6asW9Q2QAyRS9qq 9W50uPBq/rDfFdvIJ4SwxP0Fg7eduvkcBNa1M= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=UGRRdG3e9a2hW15jZgZaUD7HCAcNv8An 6/1l7NtjSiNm62jzPuYXIUXo1XrAB9ZUyHICFDhdNk6VDvPpQVM403KaXNRaNhp/ TDE6ALzhM+GPj/9qcQ28/Wb7gqQQIh8Mo1QNXtDRrxV8aL5V4QLsBln7Rwt+yB9Z Q9zi92RsBtM= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5426F83FBF; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:59:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D2C6B83FBE; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:59:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Aaron Schrab Cc: Ash Holland , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: `git describe --dirty` doesn't consider untracked files to be dirty References: <20200908231652.GC1014@pug.qqx.org> Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2020 16:59:20 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200908231652.GC1014@pug.qqx.org> (Aaron Schrab's message of "Tue, 8 Sep 2020 19:16:52 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 500FA934-F22F-11EA-B4F4-01D9BED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Aaron Schrab writes: > It's perhaps worth noting that submodules are already considered dirty > when untracked files are added: > > $ git diff vim/bundle/fugitive > > $ echo foo >vim/bundle/fugitive/foo > > $ git diff vim/bundle/fugitive > diff --git i/vim/bundle/fugitive w/vim/bundle/fugitive > --- i/vim/bundle/fugitive > +++ w/vim/bundle/fugitive > @@ -1 +1 @@ > -Subproject commit caf3b1d5696e8d39a905e48f1e89d8c0c565168c > +Subproject commit caf3b1d5696e8d39a905e48f1e89d8c0c565168c-dirty It gives one vote for (1) to the part you did not quote from the message you are responding to, which was: >> I do not think this is something we want to hide behind a >> configuration knob, but I am undecided between (1) declare that this >> is a bug and change the behaviour of "--dirty" and (2) declare that >> we discovered another useful behaviour and add a new option next to >> "--dirty". I tend to agree the consistency with that behaviour would be more useful. The discrepanthy shows the relative age of features and how our thinking has changed over time ;-)