From: Stephen R. van den Berg Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 10:11:32 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC] Plumbing-only support for storing object metadata Message-ID: <20080811101132.GB31686@cuci.nl> In-Reply-To: david@lang.hm wrote: >On Sun, 10 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>* Define a specific leading path, say ".attrs" the hierarchy to store the >> attributes information. Attributes to a file README and t/Makefile >1. tieing the attributes to the file more directly will make it much >easier to deal with them along with the file in the non-rich checkout >(it's much easier to say README* then README .attr/README*) I have to agree that from a practical standpoint for the user, having the file and the attribute tree right next to each other in the tree is a lot easier to manage. So even though setting up a shadow attribute tree is cleaner because it doesn't need some kind of magic extension, it tends to clutter the management in the flat-file checkout case. -- Sincerely, Stephen R. van den Berg. "Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!"