Re: Bug with .gitignore and branch switching
- Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 10:40:45 +0700
- From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug with .gitignore and branch switching
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> There is no "untracked but precious" vs "untracked and expendable"
>> difference in the current system. An untracked file that matches
>> patterns listed in .gitignore is treated as the latter.
>> We've discussed the lack of "untracked but precious" class a few
>> times on the list in the past, but I do not recall the topic came up
>> in the recent past. It perhaps is because nobody found that class
>> useful enough so far.
> The most recent example I can find is 2010:
> It also came up in 2007:
> Earlier in that year it even made the "What's not in 1.5.2" list.
> Perhaps those references could be a useful starting point for an
> interested person's thinking.
I think I made it work in 2014  using new "precious" attribute, but
never submitted it, probably because I was worried about the
interaction with untracked cache (adding .gitattributes as a new
dependency) though maybe we can avoid that by always checking for
preciousness after all the tree walking/filtering is done, either with
or without untracked cache. But I never addressed that loose end. Then
again, it could also be another useful starting point for interested
person's thinking ;-)