Re: [PATCH 5/5] git-add: add ignored files when asked explicitly.

[Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>]

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> On Mon, 25 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>     $ git add foo.o
>>     $ git add '*.o'
>
> Most people do
>
> 	$ git add *.o
>
> instead, where bash expands the expression. Maybe this new behaviour 
> should be hidden between a "-f" option?

When would anybody do "git add *.o"?

A more plausible situation is that you have '*.o' in .gitignore
because you do not want to keep track of object files generated
from your source, but your project needs to keep track of one
third-party object file that you do not have the source to, and
helping that situation is what this patch is about.

An alternative is to use the mechanism I added here to _detect_
the attempt to add an ignored file with explicitly spelled out
pathspec, and issue an info message that says something like:

	Path 'xyzzy/filfre.o' is not being ignored by one of
	your .gitignore files.  If you really want to add it,
	please add this entry to .gitignore file:

        !/xyzzy/filfre.o

One advantage of this is that it would help guiding the user in
the right direction, giving a reusable piece of knowledge,
without changing the behaviour of the command (what is refused
is refused).  But I can already see people's complaints: if the
tool knows how to fix that situation why forces the user to do
so?

Although the reason why the alternative does not do so is "The
user earlier said *.o files are uninteresting but came back with
a conflicting request to add xyzzy/filfre.o, which could be a
mistake.  We ask for a confirmation", which is very sensible,
another alternative would be to add the path anyway and issue an
warning, like this:

	$ ls xyzzy
        filfre.c	filfre.o
	$ git add xyzzy/filfre.?
	added ignored path xyzzy/filfre.o