Re: [PATCH 2/2] branch: let branch filters imply --list
- From
Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 31, 2013, 16:13 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1504250.y8BAS4sG2O@al>
- In-Reply-To
- <20130131064611.GB25315@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Thursday 31 January 2013 01:46:11 Jeff King wrote:
Show 26 quoted lines
> Currently, a branch filter like `--contains`, `--merged`, or > `--no-merged` is ignored when we are not in listing mode. > For example: > > git branch --contains=foo bar > > will create the branch "bar" from the current HEAD, ignoring > the `--contains` argument entirely. This is not very > helpful. There are two reasonable behaviors for git here: > > 1. Flag an error; the arguments do not make sense. > > 2. Implicitly go into `--list` mode > > This patch chooses the latter, as it is more convenient, and > there should not be any ambiguity with attempting to create > a branch; using `--contains` and not wanting to list is > nonsensical. > > That leaves the case where an explicit modification option > like `-d` is given. We already catch the case where > `--list` is given alongside `-d` and flag an error. With > this patch, we will also catch the use of `--contains` and > other filter options alongside `-d`. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Tested-by: Peter Wu <lekensteyn@gmail.com>
I have tested this patch on top of 1.8.1.2 and it seems to work.
One note, the following command spits out master without complaining about the non-existing branch name:
git branch --contains <id> master <non-existant branch name>
(the order of branches doesn't affect the result.)
Regards, Peter