Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 946385
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T22:54:23+00:00 2026-05-15T22:54:23+00:00

Every developer on my team has their own local configuration. That configuration information is

  • 0

Every developer on my team has their own local configuration. That configuration information is stored in a file called devtargets.rb which is used in our rake build tasks. I don’t want developers to clobber each other’s devtargets file, though.

My first thought was to put that file in the .gitignore list so that it is not committed to git.

Then I started wondering: is it possible to commit the file, but ignore changes to the file? So, I would commit a default version of the file and then when a developer changes it on their local machine, git would ignore the changes and it wouldn’t show up in the list of changed files when you do a git status or git commit.

Is that possible? It would certainly be a nice feature…

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-15T22:54:24+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 10:54 pm

    Sure, I do exactly this from time to time using

    git update-index --assume-unchanged [<file> ...]
    

    To undo and start tracking again (if you forgot what files were untracked, see this question):

    git update-index --no-assume-unchanged [<file> ...]
    

    Relevant documentation:

    –[no-]assume-unchanged
    When this flag is specified, the object names recorded for the paths are not updated. Instead, this option sets/unsets the "assume unchanged" bit for the paths. When the "assume unchanged" bit is on, the user promises not to change the file and allows Git to assume that the working tree file matches what is recorded in the index. If you want to change the working tree file, you need to unset the bit to tell Git. This is sometimes helpful when working with a big project on a filesystem that has very slow lstat(2) system call (e.g. cifs).

    Git will fail (gracefully) in case it needs to modify this file in the index e.g. when merging in a commit; thus, in case the assumed-untracked file is changed upstream, you will need to handle the situation manually.

    Fail gracefully in this case means, if there are any changes upstream to that file (legitimate changes, etc.) when you do a pull, it will say:

    $ git pull
    …
    From https://github.com/x/y
       72a914a..106a261  master     -> origin/master
    Updating 72a914a..106a261
    error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by merge:
                    filename.ext
     
    

    and will refuse to merge.

    At that point, you can overcome this by either reverting your local changes, here’s one way:

     $ git checkout filename.ext
    

    then pull again and re-modify your local file, or could set –no-assume-unchanged and you can do normal stash and merge, etc. at that point.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I find it hard to believe that every developer creates their icons manually in
This is a problem that every developer will face when building their apps: how
Every time a new developer joins the team or the computer a developer is
Does every j2me enabled mobile have GPS service so that the developer can locate
We are currently using Visual Studio 2010 Premium with TFS 2010. Every developer that
Has anyone successfully installed VS 2008 Team Developer edition on the Windows 7 beta
As a solo developer, I don't really need team foundation server, but I own
On large-scale Java/.Net Enterprise projects, does every developer need to have all the components/libraries/dependencies
Every Python developer is familiar with easy_install and setup tools. If I want to
i know every web-developer hates this topic, but anyway... i found no good solution

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.