Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] ref-filter: add support for %(upstream:track,nobracket)
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Oct 13, 2015, 19:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqmvvma8lt.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <vpqeggy61ma.fsf@grenoble-inp.fr>
Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
Show 9 quoted lines
>> If you see here, we detect "track" first for >> %(upstream:track,nobracket) > > Yes, but I still think that this was a bad idea. If you want > nobracket to apply to "track", then the syntax should be > %(upstream:track=nobracket). I think the "nobracket" should apply > to "upstream" (i.e. be global to the atom), hence > %(upstream:nobracket,track) and %(upstream:track,nobracket) should > both be accepted.
That makes sense to me, as I think what is being discussed would be %(upstream:track=yes,bracket=no) when it is fully spelled out.