Re: [PATCH 03/23] Introduce "skip-worktree" bit in index, teach Git to get/set this bit

Previous thread: Giving command line parameter to textconv command? by Nanako Shiraishi on Monday, December 14, 2009 - 3:17 pm. (33 messages)

Next thread: [PATCH 1/2] filter-branch: remove an unnecessary use of 'git read-tree' by Johannes Sixt on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 1:42 am. (21 messages)
From: Greg Price
Date: Monday, December 14, 2009 - 4:06 pm

I confess I can't tell how the skip-worktree bit does differ from
assume-unchanged.  Is its 'goal' different only in that you have a
different motivation for introducing it, or does it actually have a
different effect -- and what is that different effect?

Looking forward to seeing sparse checkouts soon!

Cheers,
Greg
--

From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
Date: Monday, December 14, 2009 - 8:51 pm

On the fun side, you could use both bits in the same worktree, to
narrow your worktree and have some assume-unchanged files.

Another difference is that with assume-unchanged bit, you make a
promise to Git that those assume-unchanged files are "good", Git does
not have to care for them. If somehow you violate the promise, Git can
harm your files on worktree.
-- 
Duy
--

From: Johannes Sixt
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 12:20 am

So, the difference is that skip-worktree will not overwrite a file that is
different from the version in the index, but assume-unchanged can? Right?

-- Hannes

--

From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 1:05 am

Yes.
-- 
Duy
--

Previous thread: Giving command line parameter to textconv command? by Nanako Shiraishi on Monday, December 14, 2009 - 3:17 pm. (33 messages)

Next thread: [PATCH 1/2] filter-branch: remove an unnecessary use of 'git read-tree' by Johannes Sixt on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 - 1:42 am. (21 messages)