Re: [Feature Request] Option to make .git not read-only in cloned repos

> Albert Vaca Cintora <albertvaka@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:35 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@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?