From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add read_cache to builtin-check-attr Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:38:24 -0700 Message-ID: <7vhcn2c673.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <11870975181798-git-send-email-bdowning@lavos.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Marius Storm-Olsen , Steffen Prohaska , dmitry.kakurin@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: Brian Downing X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 14 20:38:51 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IL1Hy-00022Y-3q for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 20:38:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755556AbXHNSig (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:38:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752394AbXHNSig (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:38:36 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.241.45]:33688 "EHLO fed1rmmtao101.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751936AbXHNSie (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:38:34 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20070814183826.BLEQ5405.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:38:26 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id bueQ1X00X1kojtg0000000; Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:38:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <11870975181798-git-send-email-bdowning@lavos.net> (Brian Downing's message of "Tue, 14 Aug 2007 08:18:38 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Brian Downing writes: > We can now read .gitattributes files out of the index, but the index > must be loaded for this to work. That interface is at too low a level, I am afraid. Many commands do want to control when they read the index and it affects the result, especially when the work tree traversal implemented in dir.c is involved. I am not rejecting/objecting, but just raising concerns. I do not have time to review this today, but just wanted to see if you fully assessed the implications (and if so that would save work on my end).