From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 07:34:55 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] t9350: point out that refs are not updated correctly
Message-ID: <20121025073454.GB15790@elie.Belkin>
In-Reply-To: <CAGdFq_hgYPF5eeCB9hSsjVfUyEhkBNJAtzoNuNqs5N6V-+w9Hg@mail.gmail.com>

Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

> That's weird, we have this bit:
>
> +		if (elem->whence != REV_CMD_REV && elem->whence != REV_CMD_RIGHT)
> +			continue;
>
> If I understand correctly that should cause it to only output revs
> (e.g. 'foo1') and the rhs side of a have..want spec.

If I remember right, '^foo1' is (whence == REV_CMD_REV) with (flags ==
UNINTERESTING).  That's why sequencer.c checks for unadorned revs like
this:

	if (opts->revs->cmdline.nr == 1 &&
	    opts->revs->cmdline.rev->whence == REV_CMD_REV &&
	    opts->revs->no_walk &&
	    !opts->revs->cmdline.rev->flags) {

Maybe

	if (elem->flags & UNINTERESTING)
		continue;
	if (elem->whence == REV_CMD_PARENTS_ONLY)	/* foo^@ */
		continue;

would work well here?  That would handle bizarre cases like "--not
next..master" (and ordinary cases like "master...next") better, by
focusing on the semantics instead of syntax.