Re: bug report on update-index --assume-unchanged

From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Date: Dec 6, 2014, 13:06 UTC
Message-ID: <E7C0C71D452B476D8E0E60AD75423156@PhilipOakley>
In-Reply-To: <1417826757.30899.16.camel@segulix>

From: "Sérgio Basto" <sergio@serjux.com>
[..]

Show 10 quoted lines

>> Part of the implied question is why "git commit ." would notice when
>> when "git commit -a" didn't appear to. So it's unclear as to what the
>> user should have expected.
>>
> I agree with this sentence, this is a bug because:
>
> git commit -a ( and -a means all ) is incoherent with "git commit ."
> This is stupid because when I want commit part of the tree, commit
> includes one file that is not included when I say to commit all .
> So maybe you should fix, git commit -a to be coherent .

Ultimately this (-a vs '.' with --assume-unchanged) is not a 'bug', because it does as planned. However the documenation is 'wrong' or at least misguides many readers.

Thank you for bring it to the list's attention. [..]

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> Sorry I don't have time to read all messages in thread ,
> but I'm going to test git with the patch suggest in this thread , at
> least, I solve "my" problem for some time ...
>

My patch, and Junio's 'squash' are to correct the documentation, and especially remove the line about it having an "ignore" capability, which is a promise not kept (your -a vs '.' !).

I'll be updating the documenation patch today for review, though that 
doesn't solve the wider problem of:
    - 'how to temporarily ignore changes to a tracked file'.
--
Philip