On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 03:51:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@xxxxxx> writes: > > > Am 28.06.2013 20:44, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > >> Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> ... > >>> Hmm, but does it have a --depth option for revisions? Maybe we should > >>> call it --clone-depth or --rev-depth to make it clear? --depth and > >>> --max-depth would be completely orthogonal but the name does not allow > >>> to distinguish them properly. > >> > >> I do not have a strong opinion either way, but as you suggest, it > >> might be a good idea to call this new option --clone-depth to be > >> more specific. > > > > No strong opinion here either, but I'm leaning towards "--depth" > > because on one hand we already have the "--reference" option which > > is passed on to the clone command (and not "--clone-reference")... > > OK, then "--depth" it is. > > The points in your review on the last version with "--depth" (which > I picked up and parked on 'pu') still need to be addressed, I think? I agree, I'm on it -- Med vänliga hälsningar Fredrik Gustafsson tel: 0733-608274 e-post: iveqy@xxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html