On 2014.01.24 at 12:44 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 2014.01.24 at 12:00 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:32:22PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > >> > > >> >> > However, you do have to specify each branch individually. You probably > >> >> > want to say "all branches except X", and you cannot currently specify > >> >> > a negative refspec like that. > >> >> > >> >> Yes, that was the question I wanted to ask (, sorry for not formulating > >> >> it more clearly). > >> >> Is this "negative refspec for branches" a feature that is planned for > >> >> the future? > >> > > >> > It is something that has been talked about before, but I do not think > >> > anybody is actively working on. It would probably not be too hard a > >> > feature if you are interested in getting your feet wet in git > >> > development. :) > >> > >> The end result might be not so hard in the mechanical sense, but > >> designing the interface would be hard. I do not offhand think of a > >> good way to do this. > > > > I don't know if the in-tree regex engine supports negative lookaheads. > > If it does, then something like the following should work (to use my > > "hjl" example): > > > > ^(.(?!hjl))* > > refspec wildcards are *NOT* regular expressions. Yes, but that's the point. If they were, the "negative refspec" interface issue would be solved. -- Markus -- 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