From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:09:34 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] ref-filter: add support for %(upstream:track,nobracket)
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:

>> 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.