Re: Do "git add" as a builtin

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

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:

> Thinking some more about it, I think I personally much prefer this.

I like this much better than the old (pre-builtin) behaviour.

> Especially as a quick look-through seems to say that there's actually a 
> path through git-update-index too that allows a unverified filename to get 
> into the index (the new "--unresolve" thing also misses the need to verify 
> the path).

Perhaps, but unresolve splits an entry that is available from
the heads being merged, so it would use unverified filename to
try finding the ents from trees, but get_tree_entry() would not
find one, so I think we are safe already.  Nevertheless, I think
your change makes things more strict and safer.

I doubt this would break people's scripts.  If they were relying
on the old behaviour, that means they threw real paths and
garbage at update-index and relied on it to sift them apart,
which indicates they were buggy to begin with anyway.