Re: [PATCH] Add test that checkout does not overwrite entries in .git/info/exclude

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] writes:

It dated back to f8a9d42 (read-tree: further loosen "working file will
be lost" check. - 2006-12-04) when you introduced --exclude-per-directory
to read-tree, but not --exclude-from to explicitly add .git/info/exclude.

That one together with 1127148 (Loosen "working file will be lost" check
in Porcelain-ish, 2006-12-04) complets the picture. Thanks for digging
this out.

I guess it's time to add "read-tree --exclude-from".

Perhaps, also --exclude-standard to match?

We may add an option to checkout to skip
either .git/info/exclude or .gitignore, or both.

I do not think we want to go that route, because it is not just "checkout"
but is an issue shared across users of unpack-trees machinery.

When a merge result loses build/ directory and replaces it with a regular
file "build", with the current ignore semantics, build/*.o will go but if
you had an untracked and ignored build/TODO, the file will also go, for
example. If we want to have "precious", we should either make "ignored" to
mean "precious", or introduce a "precious" as a new category
(cf. $gmane/185746)

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 12:27 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

It dated back to f8a9d42 (read-tree: further loosen "working file will
be lost" check. - 2006-12-04) when you introduced --exclude-per-directory
to read-tree, but not --exclude-from to explicitly add .git/info/exclude.

That one together with 1127148 (Loosen "working file will be lost" check
in Porcelain-ish, 2006-12-04) complets the picture. Thanks for digging
this out.

quoted

I guess it's time to add "read-tree --exclude-from".

Perhaps, also --exclude-standard to match?

Yep, will do.
-- 
Duy