Re: [PATCH 1/2] dir.c: Make git-status --ignored more consistent

2012-12-30 Thread Junio C Hamano
Antoine Pelisse writes: > By the way, that merges without conflicts with Adam's series, but it > will not compile as he renamed functions that I'm now using > (path_excluded() -> is_path_excluded() that is). > > By the way, Junio, how do you handle this situation as a maintainer ? > Do you keep a

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dir.c: Make git-status --ignored more consistent

2012-12-30 Thread Adam Spiers
On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Antoine Pelisse wrote: > By the way, that merges without conflicts with Adam's series, but it > will not compile as he renamed functions that I'm now using > (path_excluded() -> is_path_excluded() that is). Ah, renames! I forgot about those. > By the way, Junio,

Re: [PATCH 1/2] dir.c: Make git-status --ignored more consistent

2012-12-30 Thread Antoine Pelisse
By the way, that merges without conflicts with Adam's series, but it will not compile as he renamed functions that I'm now using (path_excluded() -> is_path_excluded() that is). By the way, Junio, how do you handle this situation as a maintainer ? Do you keep a note to manually make the change eve

[PATCH 1/2] dir.c: Make git-status --ignored more consistent

2012-12-30 Thread Antoine Pelisse
The current behavior of git-status is inconsistent and misleading. Especially when used with --untracked-files=all option: - files ignored in untracked directories will be missing from status output. - untracked files in committed yet ignored directories are also missing. - with --untracked-f