From: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:47:34 GMT
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2009, #05; Tue, 17)
Message-ID: <20090318074734.GI3817@genesis.frugalware.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090318055222.GA17128@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 01:52:22AM -0400, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> I am inclined to leave it as-is. The other sane option would be
> converting it to use NONEG, as Miklos suggested.
> 
> Doing it right would probably mean adding a "this option is the opposite
> of what we would usually do" flag to parse-options which would display
> the option as "no-<option>" in the usage, and would reverse clearing and
> setting the bit (i.e., --empty-directory would clear the HIDE_DIRECTORY
> bit and --no-empty-directory would set it). But I don't think it is
> worth the work to add a negatable version of an option that has never
> existed before and which nobody has requested to use.

ACK, I'm fine with the current shape of the topic branch.

I did not think about the user confusion regarding usage when I
suggested NONEG.