From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Bug#553296: gitignore broken completely Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:41:27 -0700 Message-ID: <7vaaz8lleg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20091029233458.GA32764@ikki.ethgen.de> <20091030162857.26604.qmail@67b7e3b41a17c8.315fe32.mid.smarden.org> <20091030165903.GA10671@ikki.ethgen.de> <20091030173838.GB18583@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Klaus Ethgen , 553296@bugs.debian.org, Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 30 20:42:03 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N3xMI-0004wz-L5 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:42:02 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757223AbZJ3Tlm (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757181AbZJ3Tlk (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:40 -0400 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:37935 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757010AbZJ3Tlh (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:37 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 651478B0EC; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:40 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=7ibdbIPrmytrcJSykUOUc3TiHRA=; b=MebMfM YeP+X8qClRQlHQHYy2bcrijo8t3NU8l/XMe95iTDa0cw66hlpJ+H92krPnWYOB3y voGN+pQTUkDaFKR9pH+8Ij7ynEL44Ybx3jmyqXgSudBzG95Grk84w4IV+dLzH6gT 1+CrhC72oiCeAHryEJFzmtDe7O9p+I09kF1Lc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=oluuowYctVyZBMts6HGV94pqXcJA7XB6 zoCmN0bmTYfvFBbDTLOQu+BUVEX/EJBNnz+An70QViohi6O73jxs0JYaVoCoAz81 n8e1NXs8iJTM1Rxl682tuFXu9x29WZbp4y4SDM5DRs4+RoRhQLppOLNJ6uA3qV65 y69Fjv49LTk= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 261EA8B0EB; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3D1EF8B0E8; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:41:28 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20091030173838.GB18583@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri\, 30 Oct 2009 13\:38\:38 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3C099552-C58C-11DE-AD01-A67CBBB5EC2E-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > I am not sure simply reverting is the best choice; the patch does do > something useful. And while it strictly breaks backwards compatibility > on the output without "-i", the old behavior was considered a bug. But > the "-i" behavior is useless now, so we need to figure out how to > proceed. We can: > > 1. Revert and accept that the behavior is historical. Callers need to > work around it by dropping --exclude* when invoking ls-files. > > 2. Declare "-i" useless, deprecate and/or remove. Obviously this is > also breaking existing behavior, but again, I don't think that > using "-i" actually accomplishes anything. > > 3. Revert for now, and then reinstate the patch during a major version > bump when we are declaring some compatibility breakages. > > 4. Re-work "-i" to show tracked but ignored files, but still show all > files when "-i" is not given at all. > > I think (4) preserves the benefit of the patch in question, but still > allows your usage ("git ls-files -i --exclude-standard"). I do question > whether that usage is worth supporting. Certainly I wouldn't implement > it if I were writing git-ls-files from scratch today, but we do in > general try to maintain backwards compatibility, especially for plumbing > like ls-files. > > Junio, what do you want to do? I've never understood the use of "ls-files -i" without -o, so in that sense, I have done 2. myself already long time ago. In other words, I do not really care that much, and the choice would be between "0. do not do anything---the patch in question was a bugfix for longstanding insanity" and your "4. -i without -o didn't make much sense but now it does and here is the new meaning".