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

Reply via email to