Re: RFC: git bisect should accept "paths-to-be-excluded"
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 17, 2013, 20:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqwqmfw4z8.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAA01Csp6tjKJ9LqX+9qcJL4t3kfFJCagjZQ=QwddvscPori9Ow@mail.gmail.com>
Piotr Krukowiecki <piotr.krukowiecki@gmail.com> writes:
> Ignoring (possible) inconsistency thing, I think they are easy to > understand and use.
Probably you are right (in the sense that I do not offhand think of a confusing and ambiguous set of positive and negative pathspecs; others may find holes in my/our thinking).
I am not sure if it will fit well to the current "struct pathspec" design, though. We could start from "when there is any negative pathspec, disable the 'optimize away the common leading prefix' thing", I guess.