Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2010, #06; Tue, 23)
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 24, 2010, 23:42 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v635m6w0r.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.2.00.1002241004010.1946@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> writes:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> * ne/pack-local-doc (2010-02-18) 1 commit >> - Documentation: pack-objects: Clarify --local's semantics. >> >> Comments from pack experts? > > The patch is fine in the sense that what it modifies was indeed wrong. > > However the "even if it appears in the standard input" formulation > should also be fixed as the object list may be specified with a rev spec > on the command line, and not necessarily only via standard input.
Ah, true. Perhaps something like this.
-- >8 -- Subject: pack-objects documentation: reword "objects that appear in the standard input"
These were written back when we always read objects from the standard input. These days --revs and its friends can feed only the start and end points and have the command internally enumerate the objects.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> --- Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt | 6 +++--- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt b/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt index 769f1de..1deaa65 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-pack-objects.txt @@ -120,12 +120,12 @@ base-name:: --incremental:: This flag causes an object already in a pack to be ignored - even if it appears in the standard input. + even if it would have otherwise been packed. --local:: This flag causes an object that is borrowed from an alternate - object store to be ignored even if it appears in the standard - input. + object store to be ignored even if it would have otherwise been + packed. --non-empty:: Only create a packed archive if it would contain at