[PATCH] Document ls-files -t as obsolete.

The behavior of "git ls-files -t" is very misleading (see
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/126516 and
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/144394/focus=144397
for examples of mislead users) and badly documented, hence we point the
users to superior alternatives.

The feature is marked as "obsolete" but not "scheduled for removal" since
it's a plumbing command, scripts might use it, and Git testsuite already
uses it to test the state of the index.

Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <redacted>
---
 Documentation/git-ls-files.txt |    5 +++++
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/git-ls-files.txt b/Documentation/git-ls-files.txt
index 3521637..7b86bb5 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-ls-files.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-ls-files.txt

@@ -106,6 +106,11 @@ OPTIONS
 	with `-s` or `-u` options does not make any sense.
 
 -t::
+	This feature is deprecated. Authors of scripts should use
+	linkgit:git-status[1] `--porcelain`, and users can look at
+	linkgit:git-status[1] `--short` or linkgit:git-diff[1]
+	`--name-status` for alternatives.
+
 	Identify the file status with the following tags (followed by
 	a space) at the start of each line:
 	H::	cached

-- 
1.7.0.3.299.gb22d9.dirty

Sorry for being stupid and a bit off-topic, but..

 -t::
+       This feature is deprecated. Authors of scripts should use
+       linkgit:git-status[1] `--porcelain`, [...]

I've always understood 'porcelain' as for users, and 'plumbing' for
scripts.. so, if the option is meant for scripting (as opposed to
--short), why wasn't it called --plumbing? There's obviously something
I'm not getting here! -:)

-Tor