1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
|
[[!comment format=mdwn
username="http://adamspiers.myopenid.com/"
nickname="Adam"
subject="comment 8"
date="2011-12-20T12:00:11Z"
content="""
Personally I'd rather have working rename detection but I agree it's not 100% ideal to be littering multiple directories like this, so perhaps you could make it optional, e.g. based on a git config setting?
Here are a few more considerations, some in defence of the approach, some against it:
* `.git-annex` is hidden; `CVS/` is not.
* Unlike `CVS/` and `.svn/`, it's only a symlink, not a directory containing other files.
* It doesn't contain any data specific to that directory and could easily be regenerated if deleted accidentally or otherwise.
* If a whole directory containing `.git-annex` was moved within the repository:
* git-annex would need to fix up these symlinks if and only if it's moved to a different depth within the tree.
* However, if the multi-level indirection approach is used, `.git-annex` in any subdirectory is *always* a symlink to `../.git-annex` so instead you would need to check that all of the new ancestors contain this symlink too, and optionally remove any no longer needed symlinks.
* In either case, git-annex already goes to the trouble of fixing symlinks, and if anything, I *think* this approach would reduce the number of symlinks which need checking (right?)
* find `$git_root/foo -follow`, `diff -r` etc. would traverse into `$git_root/.git/annex`
This last point is the only downside to this approach I can think of which gives me any noticeable cause for concern. However, people are already use to working around this from CVS and svn days, e.g. `diff -r -x .svn` so I don't think it's anywhere near bad enough to rule it out.
"""]]
|
