On Fri, 2016-11-11 at 13:27 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Dennis Kaarsemaker <den...@kaarsemaker.net> writes: > > > No tests or documentation updates yet, and I'm not sure whether > > --follow-symlinks in other modes than --no-index should be supported, > > ignored > > (as it is now) or cause an error, but I'm leaning towards the third option. > > > My knee-jerk reaction is: > > * The --no-index mode should default to your --follow-symlinks > behaviour, without any option to turn it on or off.
ok. > * If normal "diff" that follows symlinks by default has an option > to disable it, then it is OK to also add --no-follow-symlinks > that is only valid in the --no-index mode, so that we can mimick > it better (I do not think this is the case, though). It does not, so no new option. > * Other modes should not follow symbolic links ever, no need for a > new option. Makes sense. > In any case, I'd advise you not to reroll this too quickly and > frequently until the end of this cycle. During a feature freeze, I > won't take new topics in 'pu' as that would add more things I need > to worry about, and if you reroll in too quick succession, it will > become harder to identify the latest set and queue after the > release. I'm in no hurry, so I'll sit on this until v2.11 is done. D.
