Re: bug report on update-index --assume-unchanged

From: Sérgio Basto <sergio@serjux.com>
Date: Dec 5, 2014, 16:57 UTC
Message-ID: <1417798622.23238.6.camel@segulix>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8AVKaq4NJu=23W+wcRgVTQ7hVAOxsVwtZnZsNw6393cTA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, On Sex, 2014-12-05 at 17:52 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org> wrote:
> > Actually, it's a user error. When you set --assume-unchanged, then you give
> > a promise to git that you do not change the files, and git does not have to
> > check itself whether there is a change.
> >
> > But since you did not keep your promise, you get what you deserve. ;-)

No, I marked with assume-unchanged *after* change the file , and not before. Else don't see what is the point of assume-unchanged if you really don't change the file.

Show 5 quoted lines

> You are correct about the original idea behind --assume-unchanged. But
> over the time I think we bend over a bit and sort of support these use
> cases. For example, aecda37 (do not overwrite files marked "assume
> unchanged" - 2010-05-01). The change is one-liner, so I don't mind
> doing it.

I think is the right thing

Thanks,

-- 
Sérgio M. B.