Comment 2 by Stephen Leake, Aug 7, 2012
working in branch nvm.issue-148-80 A solution is implemented, but it's not clear it should be promoted to main. Summary: In mtn 1.0, add had two different defaults for --recursive; when --unknown is specified, --recursive defaults to true, when --unknown is not specified, --recursive defaults to false. The fix changes that. It adds the option --[no]-recursive to 'ls unknown' and 'ls ignored' (because that logic is used in 'add'). Now, for 'add', --unknown is orthogonal to --recursive, and the default for --recursive is false. This preserves the mtn 1.0 behavior for 'mtn add' (except that the warning about some files not added is gone), but for 'mtn add --unknown', we now need to explicitly add '--recursive'.
Status:
Started
Owner: stephe
Owner: stephe
Comment 3 by Stephen Leake, Aug 8, 2012
The situation in mtn 1.0 is more complicated; consider an example workspace: known_dir_1 unknown_file_1 known_dir_2 unknown_file_2 unknown_dir_3 unknown_file_3 unknown_dir_4 unknown_file_4 in mtn 1.0, 'ls unknown' lists: known_dir_1/unknown_file_1 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_file_2 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_dir_3 in mtn 1.0, 'add --unknown' adds: known_dir_1/unknown_file_1 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_file_2 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_dir_3 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_dir_3/unknown_file_3 known_dir_1/known_dir_2/unknown_dir_3/unknown_dir_ in nvm.issue-148-80, 'ls unknown' lists nothing, since there are no unknown dirs in the workspace root. in nvm.issue-148-80, 'add --unknown' adds nothing. in both branches 'add --unknown --recursive' adds all the unknown files. In the typical case of a totally unknown workspace, mtn 1.0 'add --unknown' adds the files in the root and first layer directories. In nvm.issue-148-80, 'add -unknown' adds the files and dirs in the root directory, but not the files in the first layer.
Comment 4 by Stephen Leake, Aug 22, 2012
nvm.issue-148-80 propagated to main; issue fixed in fff999548e6d92a4d16280c7bfc346dff5353274
Status:
Fixed
Sign in to reply to this comment.
Reported by joe 23, Feb 27, 2011