Re: 'git status' is not read-only fs friendly
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Sat, 10 Feb 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> So, what is the big problem about accepting that patching git-status for
>> one obscure use is wrong, wrong, wrong, when git-diff already does what is
>> needed???
>
> Because git-status itself is conceptually a read-only operation, and
> having it barf on a read-only file system is justifiably a bug.
I do not 100% agree that it is conceptually a read-only operation.