Albert Vaca Cintora <albertv...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:35 PM Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >> >> Ah, your "rm" command needs to learn "-f" option, too, then? > > The whole point of this thread was to remove the need of -f forcing the > removal.
OK, I misunderstood what you wanted to do. If an implementation of Git were making everything under .git/ read-only, including directories, then it is veriy much reasonable to complain against such an implementation. The usual "I know I am doing something unusual and forcing it" safety given by "rm -rf" is not enough to remove such a clone, and user would need "chmod -R u+w" beforehand to be able to remove---that is being unreasonably paranoid in the name of protecting against mistakes. But requiring an additional single "f" when doing "rm -rf .git"? Is that realy too much of a hassle? The option "-f" is to allow people deal with an unusual situation, while preventing everyday use from doing something harmful unintendedly. And removing a cloned repository is an unusual situation that would not happen every day, no?
