Re: what should "git clean -n -f [-d] [-x] <pattern>" do?

From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>,  git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: what should "git clean -n -f [-d] [-x] <pattern>" do?
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 11:23:32 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87plxr3zsr.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsf2nnbkj.fsf@gitster.g> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Tue, 23 Jan 2024 10:34:20 -0800")

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Then how does one figure what "git clean -f -f" will do without actually
>> doing it?
>
> I think whoever came up with the bright idea of forcing twice
> somehow does a totally different thing from forcing once should be
> shot, twice ;-)  It does not mesh well with the idea behind the
> clean.requireForce setting to make you explicitly choose either '-f'
> or '-n' to express your intent.

I agree, yet I see it as another deficiency, in addition to that of -n,
and I used it as an example to emphasize the deficiency of -n.

> I wonder how feasible is it to deprecate that misfeature introduced
> with a0f4afbe (clean: require double -f options to nuke nested git
> repository and work tree, 2009-06-30) and migrate its users (which
> is marked as "This is rarely what the user wants") to a new option,
> say, --nested-repo-too so that the "dry-run" version of the
> invocations become
>
>     git clean -n
>     git clean -n --nested-repo-too
>
> and you can substitute "-n" with "-f" to actually perform it?

Whereas obsoleting second -f in favor of new --nested-repo might be a
good idea indeed, I believe it's still a mistake for "dry run" to
somehow interfere with -f, sorry.

Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov