> From: Paul Smith <p...@mad-scientist.net>
> There are a million special case situations and it's too exhausting for
> both the author and the reader to be sure to cover all of them every
> time, which is why you perceive ambiguities in the documentation.

There is a definition of "tracked" which was settled upon by the
people who established the overall design of Git.  The code within Git
is written to match that definition of "tracked" (assuming there are
no bugs).  So you should write the documentation to give that
definition.  That way the documentation is *correct in every
situation*.  You don't leave the poor user stuck with having to
experiment to see what Git actually does in some peculiar case.

> From: Pierre-François CLEMENT <lik...@gmail.com>
> It somehow is IMO, as I got that feeling from my day-to-day use of git and 
> from reading its manual, so it might be the symptoma of some incoherences 
> across the tool's usage and/or definitions.

That's true, there may be incoherences, that is, there may be errors
in that the code or documentation does not implement the designers'

> >     Remember that each file in your working directory can be in one of 
> >     two states: tracked or untracked. Tracked files are files that 
> >     were in the last snapshot; they can be unmodified, modified, or 
> >     staged. Untracked files are everything else — any files in your 
> >     working directory that were not in your last snapshot and are not 
> >     in your staging area. 
> >
> > If you read carefully, you'll note that it is self-contradictory:  His 
> > definition of tracked excludes staged-but-not-in-the-head-commit files 
> > but his definition of untracked also excludes those files.
> It is a bit self-contradictory, but only in the listing of what such files 
> can be. Apart from that, the definition *"Tracked files are files that were 
> in the last snapshot [...]. Untracked files are everything else"* is pretty 
> clear, and describes exactly my understanding of such files. So, to answer 
> André's original question, I think might indeed be either a bug or a 
> missing feature.

Yes, I wasn't reading carefully enough myself.  But you'll not that
"Untracked files are everything else" is different from "any files in
your working directory that were not in your last snapshot and are not
in your staging area" -- files that are in the working directory, are
in the staging area, but are not in the last commit are included in
the first description but aren't included in the second description.
And it is precisely those files that are causing the confusion here.

> I think I'm gonna mail g...@vger.kernel.org (the "official" mailing list 
> <http://git-scm.com/community>) to see what they think about it. Would it 
> be wrong to reply to this conversation with a summary of it, CC'ed to 
> g...@vger.kernel.org? I'm not quite confident with using public mailing 
> lists just yet.

It would be a very good idea if you get an "authoritative" answer to
add it to the discussion here.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to