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-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 964221F453 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 21:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726366AbfAWVIo (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:08:44 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:35086 "EHLO mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726307AbfAWVIo (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jan 2019 16:08:44 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id 96so4170119wrb.2 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:08:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:message-id:user-agent :mime-version; bh=aNK0/591lTqHl2WbNM/b83IVmIIX/Kqb8lhbyPn4za0=; b=BJzJLZ9AN4ZGZ9qvoVxLnIRE8AImc8pWKkxSCOi4uZsCp9davUUk8UIP2LVCD6u3o/ jAbkUAFyao4t51OMYUQTNKf7THzAT+F+q3QorSZSjF/AS0QolpKrMBJL4RB6dYoweRdi TxJ3gUtOH7/JgHTxCwbTTeA/fl9KVAbZJ15VwR8eLzCueLpddanKBG1P7mFUBSt6eZZ6 eQhcE6CRPKJ13xl0HyZipHlCvD1DmjOpArauKOrCAcCjRNIImSFZK49YeY6/zjEddbzL jyXj/L45zAAj8iSwly0P8VHKsqrAToP517IGdLpR1iBUARwVROD5xdMelJPoB6F4t1K2 o3BQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=aNK0/591lTqHl2WbNM/b83IVmIIX/Kqb8lhbyPn4za0=; b=RTQ2YI2sCTmRsCLK0B/3fyUuZj5NBGPA127ZukdqGtSy9fMDgHLfyvvAf5EFjmoEoE LV0l6GARKKzVYOnUYVXxoKeABiFawJ52dKTDSUTpj6AEgaWRdSDf3KJJiK9httzMdnuy K4gqETyulZcUXQS0BzhQ5IwMhgH+UZhrQQdpJYOKYfxuabRjUX4W0nszASVAfoUXmRVj e/n7gcs4Uggre3glEAtwNdVas2aUSoKB7b4LXRnjEoDqQhtxquucp+Lav3sKy2+s8+I2 oI1p74B7Nt/u5GA7ioxQDzgcKnTJWxpCQAxpuMLYcGZQiJWyDoEA8fwQQycJD3jPUdU/ 0ZCw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfNp9x45V4b/q+z5YFwrbKAwvpjbueWQVrSfHKE8SXepLy1fSqw rearJEEwdrehGKepugzyMxk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5BfEO1mlfpKTO8OGNJA2hwjm2SiWuuJ+CgPRBw6ZSibDkpWxajwMh3AZB9fW6WVnRhmc2JTw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:9d85:: with SMTP id p5mr4173225wre.41.1548277722224; Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:08:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g9sm56687499wmg.44.2019.01.23.13.08.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:08:41 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Thomas Gummerer Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , Elijah Newren , Eric Sunshine Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] checkout: introduce --{,no-}overlay option References: <20181220134820.21810-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20190108215225.3077-1-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20190108215225.3077-8-t.gummerer@gmail.com> <20190122235313.GA199923@google.com> <20190123202156.GA11293@hank.intra.tgummerer.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 13:08:41 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gummerer writes: >> I had no idea what --overlay would mean and am still not clear on it. >> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just >> call it --ignore-removal? > > Yes, it seems like they are very similar. Hmm, I am not sure if the word "removal" makes sense in the context of "checkout", as "removal" is an _action_ just like "checking out" itself is, and not a _state_. You'd check out a state out of a tree to the index and the working tree, so "checking out absence of a path" may make sense, though, as "absence of a path" is a state recorded in that source tree object. The word "removal" makes little sense in "git add --ignore-removal", but it and "git add --no-all" outlived their usefulness already, so it may not be worth _fixing_ it. But I am mildly opposed to spread the earlier mistake to a new option.