smudge: When annex.largefiles=anything, files that were already stored in
git, and have not been modified could sometimes be converted to being
stored in the annex. Changes in 7.20191024 made this more of a problem.
This case is now detected and prevented.
The git add behavior changes could be avoided if it turns out to be
really annoying, but then it would need to behave the old way when
annex.dotfiles=false and the new way when annex.dotfiles=true. I'd
rather not have the config option result in such divergent behavior as
`git annex add .` skipping a dotfile (old) vs adding to annex (new).
Note that the assistant always adds dotfiles to the annex.
This is surprising, but not new behavior. Might be worth making it also
honor annex.dotfiles, but I wonder if perhaps some user somewhere uses
it and keeps large files in a directory that happens to begin with a
dot. Since dotfiles and dotdirs are a unix culture thing, and the
assistant users may not be part of that culture, it seems best to keep
its current behavior for now.
eg, `git-annex get . ..` used to order the files strangly, because it
did not realize that when git ls-files output eg "foo", that should be
grouped with the first set of files and not the second set.
Fixed by making dirContains "." "./foo" = True
which makes sense, because dirContains ".." "../foo" = True
* annex.addunlocked can be set to an expression with the same format used by
annex.largefiles, in case you want to default to unlocking some files but
not others.
* annex.addunlocked can be configured by git-annex config.
Added a git-annex-matching-expression man page, broken out from
tips/largefiles.
A tricky consequence of this is that git-annex add --relaxed
honors annex.addunlocked, but an expression might want to know the size
or content of an url, which it's not going to download. I decided it was
better not to fail, and just dummy up some plausible data in that case.
Performance impact should be negligible. The global config is already
loaded for annex.largefiles. The expression only has to be parsed once,
and in the simple true/false case, it should not do any additional work
matching it.
e53070c1f quietly made it set the local git config too, but that was never
documented anywhere, and it had surprising results. If I set
annex.largefiles globally in a repo, I would expect to be able to change it
in another repo, and the original repo would get the change and use it,
rather than being stuck on the old value set there.
And, if I have a local annex.largefiles and set a different global default,
I'd be surprised to have my local setting overwritten.
annex.securehashesonly does need to be set locally, since it's a security
feature and the global is only a default until it gets set locally. So
special cased.
annex.largefiles can be configured by git-annex config, to more easily set
a default that will also be used by clones, without needing to shoehorn the
expression into the gitattributes file. The git config and gitattributes
override that.
Whenever something is added to git-annex config, we have to consider what
happens if a user puts a purposfully bad value in there. Or, if a new
git-annex adds some new value that an old git-annex can't parse.
In this case, a global annex.largefiles that can't be parsed currently
makes an error be thrown. That might not be ideal, but the gitattribute
behaves the same, and is almost equally repo-global.
Performance notes:
git-annex add and addurl construct a matcher once
and uses it for every file, so the added time penalty for reading the global
config log is minor. If the gitattributes annex.largefiles were deprecated,
git-annex add would get around 2% faster (excluding hashing), because
looking that up for each file is not fast. So this new way of setting
it is progress toward speeding up add.
git-annex smudge does need to load the log every time. As well as checking
the git attribute. Not ideal. Setting annex.gitaddtoannex=false avoids
both overheads.
Remove dup definitions and just use the RawFilePath one. </> etc are
enough faster that it's probably faster than building a String directly,
although I have not benchmarked.
