On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 12:05:46AM +0700, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote: > > Should this be "for-ci/**", or are we intending for "for-ci-foo" to > > work? I'd suspect anybody who uses this would use a full directory > > namespace in a refspec (like "refs/heads/*:refs/heads/for-ci/*"). It > > might be simpler conceptually to only support that. > > I made this because I saw someone mentioned that they would like to > push to 'for-ci' and expect it works for them. > > I guess it may be better to have: > > - for-ci > - for-ci/** Ah, that makes sense. Yeah, the double-rule looks fine to me, but understanding that use, the original "for-ci**" is OK to me, too. -Peff
