Alexandr Miloslavskiy <alexandr.miloslavskiy@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 01.08.2019 17:56, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> So, reading paths from a file (which could be "-" as you suggest) >> would be a good solution for that. > > To summarize: > 1) Implement --paths-file for high-level commands. > 2) '--paths-file -' would mean reading from stdin. > > Is that something you're ready to accept patches for? To be honest, I am personally not enthused to any move that encourages scripting around Porcelain commands, but being able to feed a set of paths not from the command line may still be useful for some of them and I've taken and I'll take changes that are against my taste, as long as there are wide support by others. So I will *not* say "I can tell you upfront that such patches will be waste of time as they will not be even looked at". That does not mean that any patch along that line will automatically be accepted, of course, so the answer to "am I ready to accept" question is a definite no. No, I am not ready---we will have to look at the actual patches before deciding.
