Re: [PATCH 3/8] archive: add a failure test wrt .gitattributes misreading

From: René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Date: Apr 17, 2009, 20:15 UTC
Message-ID: <49E8E368.2010703@lsrfire.ath.cx>
In-Reply-To: <7v4owpm2il.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano schrieb:

Show 12 quoted lines

> René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> writes:
> 
>> Hmm, "fix" implies that something is broken without this option, which
>> is not necessarily the case.
> 
> "What is recorded in the tree is unsuitable for the purpose of this
> particular export, so we are xxxing using yyy", is the intended use case,
> and I think the verb "fix" is a good fit there in "xxx" part.  "Tweak"
> would also work well.
> 
> Your suggestion is to say "attributes from the work tree" in place of
> "yyy", which also is good.

> I got the impression that people tend to prefer the operation named after
> what it does than how it does it, but I can go either way.

That's a good rule to follow in general. "Fix" sounds to me as if git's default behaviour is wrong and needs an option to make it work correctly, though. It's too broad a term.

I think the fixing, tweaking or even breaking will be done by the user, when editing the attribute files in the work tree. git then only applies or evaluates these attributes, creating the archive using a different source of meta data. "--worktree-attributes" captures this nicely.

René