From: Bo Yang <struggleyb.nku@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:56:45 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Introduce pathspec struct
Message-ID: <AANLkTinrOxDvzm2-zG+huNp=00+o4XqYwnsfhjOFEEoH@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v7hi6us35.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

2010/9/28 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Just a couple of quick notes.
>
>  - I had to eject Bo's "log -L range path" series in order to push this
>   out on 'pu' as the range stuff adds new callsites to the old pathspec
>   API.
>
>   This is tentative and does not mean Bo's series is getting rejected;
>   I'd want to get its command line parsing around the pathnames fixed
>   anyway but I suspect the affected codepath would overlap between the
>   two series.  Help is appreciated.

Ah, it is not very astonished to see this series put into 'pu' since I
am not active these days. :)

Hmm, let me make a summary about the requirement for the pathname
command line options:
1. The syntax now 'git log <rev> -L l:m path1 -L l:m path2' got clash
with current git command line style 'git subcommand dash-option <rev>
path'. Since we support multiple paths with multiple ranges, I think
the best way to comply with git command line style is to change it to
'git log -L l:m path1 -L l:m path2 <rev>'.

2. The way I parse the command line should make a little change, that
in '-L' in callback to parse both range and path arguments.

That's it?

-- 
Regards!
Bo
----------------------------
My blog: http://blog.morebits.org
Why Git: http://www.whygitisbetterthanx.com/