On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 02:02:41PM -0800, Emily Shaffer wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:34:17AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > The reason I ask is because (correct me if I'm wrong) a lot of other git > > > commands (like add, reset and checkout) don't seem to accept pathspecs > > > via stdin and could suffer the same problem. xargs seems like a more > > > general way of solving the problem of long command lines. > > > > You contributors who are potentially throwing your own topics into > > the cauldron, please be paying a bit more attention to other topics > > already cooking in the pot. I think am/pathspec-from-file wants to > > go in the general direction. > > Thanks for pointing it out. It is certainly easy to miss the big picture > when you spend your time looking at a bug queue instead of a review > queue; we who stand in different places see different things more > clearly. I appreciate the reminder to look around a little more. > > am/pathspec-from-file does solve this issue in the way that we discussed > internally, so I'm excited to base a solution for this issue on that > branch instead. In fact, as I think further, it could be that the solution is "don't change anything, just use --pathspec-from-file". But I think my next question will still be useful to learn the response to anyway. :) > In this situation - where it is not a related fixup for a branch in > next, but the topic does rely on that branch - should I send a series > which is based on 'next'? How do I make the dependency clear to you via > emailed patch? > > - Emily
