Hi,
On 24/01/2019 01:12, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Thomas Gummerer writes:
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just
call it --ignore-removal?
Yes, it seems like they are very similar.
Hmm, I am not sure if the word
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 9:26 AM Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
> >> I find --ignore-removal fairly easy to understand, and I had no idea
> >> what --overlay would mean.
> >>
> >> I realize this is just one user's experience.
> >
> > Exactly. My imp
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> I find --ignore-removal fairly easy to understand, and I had no idea
>> what --overlay would mean.
>>
>> I realize this is just one user's experience.
>
> Exactly. My impression was the exact opposite from yours.
>
> The phrase "removal" in the
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> I find --ignore-removal fairly easy to understand, and I had no idea
> what --overlay would mean.
>
> I realize this is just one user's experience.
Exactly. My impression was the exact opposite from yours.
The phrase "removal" in the context of checkout does not click
On 01/23, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> > On 01/22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > As checkout is a porcelain command, I had hoped it would be okay to
> > also have this as a configuration option, for the time before
> > 'checkout-paths' exists and while I'm getting used to actua
On 01/23, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Thomas Gummerer writes:
> >> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just
> >>> call it --ignore-removal?
> >>
> >> Yes, it seems like they are very similar.
> >
> > Hmm, I
Hi,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Gummerer writes:
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just
>>> call it --ignore-removal?
>>
>> Yes, it seems like they are very similar.
>
> Hmm, I am not sure if the word "removal" makes sense in the con
Thomas Gummerer writes:
>> I had no idea what --overlay would mean and am still not clear on it.
>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just
>> call it --ignore-removal?
>
> Yes, it seems like they are very similar.
Hmm, I am not sure if the word "removal" makes sense
Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> On 01/22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> I had no idea what --overlay would mean and am still not clear on it.
>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just
>> call it --ignore-removal?
>
> Yes, it seems like they are very similar. I'm happy to rename
On 01/22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > Currently 'git checkout' is defined as an overlay operation, which
> > means that if in 'git checkout -- []' we have an
> > entry in the index that matches , but that doesn't exist in
> > , that entry will not be removed fro
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> I'm nervous about the config with no associated warning or plan for
> phasing it out.
This was discussed long ago (in my panda-brain timescale) but my
recollection is to keep "checkout" default to the traditional
"overlay what was read from the tree on top of the curren
Hi,
Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> Currently 'git checkout' is defined as an overlay operation, which
> means that if in 'git checkout -- []' we have an
> entry in the index that matches , but that doesn't exist in
> , that entry will not be removed from the index or the
> working tree.
>
> Introduce
Currently 'git checkout' is defined as an overlay operation, which
means that if in 'git checkout -- []' we have an
entry in the index that matches , but that doesn't exist in
, that entry will not be removed from the index or the
working tree.
Introduce a new --{,no-}overlay option, which allows
13 matches
Mail list logo
