From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 22:13:46 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/11] Port tag.c over to use ref-filter APIs
Message-ID: <CAOLa=ZTf-rQuc_Hv=8NnYx_j8YGJuYNmOa+nz=MeoxAK6JFU3Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7fpc6n5o.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:51 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>> It is very very dissapointing to allow the "next atom only"
>>> implementation to squat on a good name "align:<type>,<width>",
>>> especially when I thought that the list agreed
>>>
>>>   %(align:<type>,<width>) any string with or without %(atom) %(end)
>>>
>>> would be the way to go.
>>
>> From what I read, I thought we wanted the next atom or string to be
>> aligned, if we need to align everything within the %(end) atom.
>
> Is that a serious comment?
>
> Did I read too much into your $gmane/275119, expecting that you
> understood everything you are saying "That's a good way to go" to?

Sorry, I kinda was thinking only WRT to the %(if) and %(end) part of it.
Even though you clearly mentioned about %(align) also.

>
>> I could do that :)
>
> Sure ;-)

I have it ready, will wait to see if there are more comments and send with
next iteration of the series.

-- 
Regards,
Karthik Nayak