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

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Mar 24, 2016, 22:40 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kYDWJDDJ+doy3NcZH_dqbbFE8U2UHZjnYYTo5R9GTsghQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqbn637cpe.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Discuss.
>>
>>> For example, I keep
>>> a backup version of whats-cooking.txt in the working tree that I use
>>> to manage the 'todo' branch as whats-cooking.txt+, and this is not
>>> explicitly "ignored".
>>
>> Completely side tracking thought: Have you considered ignoring
>> whats-cooking.txt+ locally?
>
> The point is that I shouldn't have to.  I wasn't asking for a
> workaround.

It is not a workaround. You want to have an untracked file in a repository, but you want git add to ignore it, which sounds like the definition of the ignoring mechanism.

Show 7 quoted lines

> 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.

>> Discuss.
>
> Eh, please don't.  Somehow this no longer reproduces for me.

Uh, is there a good way to test auto completion if at all in our test suite? (Would we want such a thing to be tested?)