Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] ref-filter: add support for %(upstream:track,nobracket)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]