Thanks for the clarifications. Just a quick comment about the summary:

Jeff King <> wrote:
> Yeah, I had the same thought. So you would have to either:
>   1. Hook the feature into git-archive, which knows about how it
>      recurses, and can report the correct set of paths.
> or
>   2. Tell check-attr (or some post-processor) to apply the attribute to
>      elements below the path (or possibly to prune out such paths). This
>      is not the same as recursive application, because you cannot negate
>      it (i.e., you actually find out the final attrs for both "foo" and
>      "foo/bar", and then say "the attr for 'foo' overrides the attr for
>      'foo/bar'".
> I posted a patch for (1), but it felt not-very-general. But (2) also
> feels gross and not very general. Even though it could in theory be used
> for things besides git-archive, it is really just applying git-archive's
> pruning rule, which other programs likely don't care about.

I actually think the first approach is not such a bad idea, it would
make "archive" more of a general-purpose archiving tool/helper for the
repository rather than just something for the special cases of tars and
zips. But I guess that's somewhat subjective.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to