Re: [PATCH v3] Introduce BEL<branch> as shortcut to the tracked branch

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mar 20, 2009, 12:46 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0903201345190.6865@intel-tinevez-2-302>
In-Reply-To: <adf1fd3d0903200533s2be08ee7t58a22180b1c886c0@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Santi Béjar wrote:

Show 28 quoted lines

> 2009/3/20 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>
> > On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
> >
> >> El 20/3/2009, a las 10:29, Johannes Schindelin escribió:
> >>
> >> >Often, it is quite interesting to inspect the branch tracked by a 
> >> >given branch.  This patch introduces a nice notation to get at the 
> >> >tracked branch: 'BEL<branch>' can be used to access that tracked 
> >> >branch.
> >> >
> >> >A special shortcut 'BEL' refers to the branch tracked by the current 
> >> >branch.
> >> >
> >> >Suggested by Pasky and Shawn.
> >>
> >> What does BEL actually stand for? I read Shawn's suggestion, but it's 
> >> not immediately clear to me what "BEL" means.
> >
> > It is the ASCII "bell" character, 007 (I always wanted to write that 
> > magic identifier into a patch).
> >
> > FWIW you could type it in a regular ANSI terminal using Control-v 
> > Control-g.
> 
> Can we use branch^{origin} instead? It is longer to type, but uses the 
> same syntax as the ^{tree}, ^{commit}, ^{tag} and you don't have to know 
> how to produce the bell character.

I think I addressed that issue already.  (Summary: I do not like it)

Let me spell it out if it was not obvious yet: the BEL patch was meant as a more or less funny reminder that the issue is not solved and that I need help.

Ciao, Dscho