On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 07:50:53PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Behavior change: "--exclude --blah --remotes" will not exclude remote
> branches any more. Only "--exclude --remotes" does.
>
> This is because --exclude is going to have a new friend --decorate-reflog
> who haves the same way. When you allow a distant --remotes to complement
> a previous option, things get complicated. In
>
> --exclude .. --decorate-reflog ... --remotes
>
> Does it mean decorate remote reflogs, or does it mean exclude remotes
> from the selected revisions?
I don't think it means either. It means to include remotes in the
selected revisions, but excluding the entries mentioned by --exclude.
IOW:
--exclude=foo --remotes
include all remotes except refs/remotes/foo
--exclude=foo --unrelated --remotes
same
--exclude=foo --decorate-reflog --remotes
decorate reflogs of all remotes except "foo". Do _not_ use them
as traversal tips.
--decorate-reflog --exclude=foo --remotes
same
IOW, the ref-selector options build up until a group option is given,
which acts on the built-up options (over that group) and then resets the
built-up options. Doing "--unrelated" as above is orthogonal (though I
think in practice nobody would do that, because it's hard to read).
> Granted, there may be valid use cases for such a combination (e.g.
> "decorate all reflogs except remote ones") but I feel option order is
> not a good fit to express them.
That would be spelled:
--exclude=refs/remotes --decorate-reflogs --all
(or you could swap the first two options).
Again, I'm not sure if I'm missing something subtle, or if you are
confused about how --exclude works. :)
-Peff