On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 3:51 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Junio: This will merge conflict with my in-flight --no-contains >>> patch. I can re-send either one depending on which you want to accept >>> first, this patch will need an additional test for --no-contains. I >>> just wanted to get this on the ML for review before the --no-contains >>> patch hit "master". > > I haven't looked at the patch text of this one closely yet, but I > think the goals of both make sense, so we would eventually want to > have them both. > > I also think that "if you said --contains, --merged, etc. you are > already asking to give you a list and cannot be creating a new one", > which is the topic of this patch, makes sense even if nobody were > interested in asking "--no-contains". > > So perhaps you would want this applied first, so that existing three > can already benefit from "implicit --list" before waiting for the > other one? Yes, let's do this one first. I'll address the comments that have come up & just make this all part of one series on top of JK's patches.