Re: [PATCH] git-add: allow --ignore-missing always, not just in dry run

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Thomas Rast [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

  $ git grep 'git[ -]add' t/ | wc -l
  1540
  $ git grep 'git[ -]update-index --add' t/ | wc -l
  269
  $ git grep 'git[ -]update-index --add' v1.6.0 t/ | wc -l
  251
  $ git grep 'git[ -]add' v1.6.0 t/ | wc -l
  705

Stop being silly.

Have you actually looked at these usage?  Some of them are genuinely
testing if "git add" works correctly, so it is out of the scope of this
discussion, but others that could be "git update-index" are feeding the
paths known to the script to exist (and we want 'git add' to error out
if that is not the case).

I'm sorry if I sound silly, that was totally not the point.  I also
admit that I did not look at the usages at all.  I merely wanted to
point out that the understanding in the git community *itself* has
evolved to use git-add instead of git update-index --add in its own
scripting.  Admittedly the statistics are even more striking than I
could possibly hope for.

So I am challenging the notion that git-add is not recommended for use
in scripts, which is how I understood your parenthetical remark

} If somebody is writing a script using "git add" (which is not recommended
} to begin with)

We're no longer following that advice ourselves, how can we expect users
to adhere to it?

More generally, scripts in t/ directories are "scripts", but it is totally
different from the kind of "user facing script that behaves as if it is a
complete command, taking its own command line arguments, passing them
through to the underlying plumbing commands".

I don't understand what distinction you are trying to make here.  Maybe
my mental model of the plumbing/porcelain separation (which is mostly
about interface stability) is wrong?

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch