Re: [RFD] minor frustration in 'git add' pathname completion

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>>> If I were to explicitly ignore that file, then even though I know
>>> whats-cooking.txt is not ignored,
>>>
>>>    $ git add whats-coo<HT>
>>>
>>> would not offer anything.  I'd be left scratching my head, wondering
>>> if I mistyped the early part of the filename (e.g. "wahts-coo<HT>"?).
>>
>> Well, git add cannot do anything with either of the files, so why would
>> it offer to complete to one of them?
>>
>> In an ideal world it would tell you whats-cooking.txt doesn't need
>> adding and whats-cooking.txt+ is ignored locally so excluded from
>> being added.
>
> Exactly my point that you omitted from your quoting ;-)
>
> Because the completion cannot give such an explanation, the
> behaviour gives an unnecessary confusion to the user.  If it offered
> whats-cooking.txt as a candidate, at least the behaviour would make
> sense to the user.  "Doesn't need adding" is quite different from
> "must not be added". In other words, "git add A && git add A" does
> not hurt, but "git add A~" would because the latter would only makes
> you see unnecessary error message ("You need -f if you really mean
> it").
>
>