From: JAYATHEERTH K Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2026 02:48:51 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] repo: add support for path-related fields Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3983da40-bf2c-4665-a7d9-dfebaacb8bd3@gmail.com> > > Short question: Is using format modifier like (%path:relative), > (%path:absolute) a good solution here? I think it can be implemented by > simply adding a path parsing function in ref-filter.c (and some other > work that aren't particularly challenging). > I see your point here. but wouldn't this effectively be the same as Ayush's suggestion, just with a different syntax? Whether we use distinct keys (path.absolute.toplevel) or format modifiers (%(path:absolute)) It would still result in almost the same internals. > > Short question: Is using format modifier like (%path:relative), > (%path:absolute) a good solution here? I think it can be implemented by > simply adding a path parsing function in ref-filter.c (and some other > work that aren't particularly challenging). > > It should be user-friendly, readable and free of global flags, right? :-] I don't think the syntax is a concern, even if both of them are equally verbose. Coming to user friendliness I believe Junio has already raised an appropriate question.