2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:23
John Keeping [off-list ref] writes:
git-hash-object(1) implies that it will apply the clean filter and EOL conversion when it's given a path to a file in the working tree (as it is here). Is that not the case?
Applying clean to smudged contents _ought to_ recover clean version, but is that "ought to" something you would want to rely on?
From: John Keeping <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:23
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:40:55AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
John Keeping [off-list ref] writes:quoted
git-hash-object(1) implies that it will apply the clean filter and EOL conversion when it's given a path to a file in the working tree (as it is here). Is that not the case?Applying clean to smudged contents _ought to_ recover clean version, but is that "ought to" something you would want to rely on?
How does git-status figure out that file that has been touch'd does not have unstaged changes without relying on this? Surely this case is no different from that? John