Re: GIT_CEILING_DIRECTORY

2016-03-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Mar 09, 2016, at 09:29 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >Let me understand the use case. You have $HOME/.git that governs >everything under $HOME, but there are parts of $HOME/, such as >$HOME/projects/*, that will never be controled by $HOME/.git? Correct. >Two obvious reactions are: > > -

GIT_CEILING_DIRECTORY

2016-03-09 Thread Barry Warsaw
I put my home directory under git (recently converted from bzr), but since I have some subdirectories under $HOME that are not under git (and some that are) I want to stop e.g. `git status` from traversing up into $HOME. For example, I have a ~/projects directory with lots of subdirectories so

Re: Git's inconsistent command line options

2015-09-01 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Sep 01, 2015, at 09:42 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >That way, you are forcing all the existing scripts to be updated to >say "git -c ..." for _all_ invocations of Git they have, aren't you? No, why? If the default value enables the current ui, then no scripts need changing. Users can enable

Re: Git's inconsistent command line options

2015-09-01 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Sep 01, 2015, at 02:28 AM, David Aguilar wrote: >While a script writer could write, "git -c core.cliversion=1 ...", >no one does that, no one wants to do that, and it just seems >like a bad idea that's best left unexplored. Sure, no one will do that from the command line, but I don't think

Re: Git's inconsistent command line options

2015-08-31 Thread Barry Warsaw
On Aug 31, 2015, at 05:10 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: >I'm probably shot down for this. But could we go with a clean plate >and create a new command prefix (something like git-next, git2, or >gt...)? We could then redesign the entire UI without worrying about >backward compatibility. At some point we