Heiko Voigt <hvo...@hvoigt.net> writes: > This is my current work in progress. Sergey it would be awesome if you > could test these and tell me whether the behaviour is what you would > expect. Once that is settled I will add some tests and possibly clean up > some code. > > Since nobody spoke against this change of behavior I assume that we > agree on the general approach I am taking here. If not please speak up > now so we can work something out and save me implementation time ;-) > > Whats still missing is:
Before listing what's missing, can you describe what "the general approach" is? After all, that is what you are assuming that has got a silent concensus, but without getting it spelled out, others would easily miss what they "agreed" to. I do think that it is a good thing to make what "git add ." does and what "git status ." reports consistent, and "git add ." that does not add everything may be a good step in that direction (another possible solution may be to admit that ignore=all was a mistake and remove that special case altogether, so that "git status" will always report a submodule that does not match what is in the HEAD and/or index). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
