Re: .gitignore, .gitattributes, .gitmodules, .gitprecious?, .gitacls? etc.

Petr Baudis <pasky <at> suse.cz> writes:

On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:48:34PM CEST, David Kastrup wrote:

quoted

Sergio Callegari <scallegari <at> arces.unibo.it> writes:

quoted

Couldn't all this directory/ownership/permission tracing be easily
done by using hooks?  E.g. Having a pre-status and pre-commit hook
one could fire up a program/script to collect all the extra info he
wants to trace and store it somewhere (typically in some traced
file).  The other way round one could have a post-checkout hook and
he could arrange it to fire up some program to look into the
extra-info file to set up all the meta-data he wants.

This would be very flexible and would permit to manage absolutely
/any/ kind of the metadata leaving absolute freedom about how to do
so.

Am I missing something here?

Merging.

Fetching.

Even here, I must be missing something, as I cannot see the issue.

If I need to fetch from someone who is tracing metadata, then there are 2
alternatives:

1) I am fetching only for myself and I am not interested in metadata at all.
All I need to do is to fetch. With this I will fetch a repository with
one/some extra file/files (e.g. .helper-metadata).

2) I am interested in the metadata tracing (e.g. to interact with
my origin). Then it is sufficient to first install the same set of
metadata tracing helpers as my origin and after that to do the fetch.
With this I will fetch a repository including the traced metadata files
just as above, yet these would be immediately be used by the helpers
through the hooks. For instance, as soon as anything gets checked out the
proper metadata can be applied.

Obviously, before installing any hooks, I should trust their origin.  But I
believe that if hooks get this kind of usage, rapidly we will see
the growth of trustable "standard" hooks-bundles for many tasks.