From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 18:41:35 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 21/25] rev-list: add --index-objects option Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20141015224430.GU25630@peff.net> Jeff King writes: > There is currently no easy way to ask the revision traversal > machinery to include objects reachable from the index (e.g., > blobs and trees that have not yet been committed). This > patch adds an option to do so. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King > --- > I was tempted to call this just "--index", because I could not think of > what else "--index" would mean in the context of rev-list. But I also > worried about weird interactions with other commands that take revision > arguments. And since this is mostly for internal use anyway, I figured > the more verbose name is not too bad. I could be convinced otherwise, > though. I agree that "--index" is a bad name as it usually is used in a particular context: the command can work on various combination of working tree and the index, and I am asking it to work on both (e.g. "apply --index" as opposed to "apply --cached"). > diff --git a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt > index 4cf94c6..03ab343 100644 > --- a/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt > +++ b/Documentation/rev-list-options.txt > @@ -172,6 +172,13 @@ explicitly. > Pretend as if all objects mentioned by reflogs are listed on the > command line as ``. > > +--index-objects:: This risks "index" getting misunderstood as a verb, e.g. "please enumerate the objects and assign labels to later refer to them", doesn't it? "--indexed-objects" (short for "--show-objects-in-the-index") or something? > + Pretend as if all objects used by the index (any blobs, and any > + trees which are mentioned by the index's cache-tree extension) > + ad listed on the command line. Note that you probably want to s/ad/are/, probably? > + use `--objects`, too, as there are by definition no commits in > + the index. For gitlinks/submodules, the index records names of the commit objects, they are not listed, and that is the right behaviour, but this description invites some confusion.