Re: Not going beyond symbolic links

On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

... Because this is definitely not a black-and-white "one behavior is
wrong and one behavior is right".

I wish I could agree with you that this is a feature, but 16a4c61
(read-tree -m -u: avoid getting confused by intermediate symlinks.,
2007-05-10) and 64cab59 (apply: do not get confused by symlinks in the
middle, 2007-05-11) came from real world breakage cases and the root cause
was that we were too lenient to allow such a "feature" that pretends the
symlink not to be there.

Right now, we are being careful only while branch switching and patch
application, but the codepaths that add directly to the index (add and
update-index) are not fixed (or "still has the feature").

I do not see a clean way to keep such a "feature" without hurting users
who suffered the bugs these two commits from May 2007 fixed.

config option?

I think a command line is too much work for too little value, but if the 
check could be ignored based on a config option without costing too much 
it may be reasonable.

David Lang