Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > +test_expect_success 'bisect start without -- uses unknown arg as path restriction' ' >> >> To avoid the overly long line (and also to re-use existing naming >> conventions), I replaced "path restrictions" by "pathspecs" here. What do >> you think? > > It's not a huge issue, but I tend to prefer using "restrictions" > because the tests that check that these arguments are used properly > are called "restricting bisection on one dir" and "restricting > bisection on one dir and a file". So I feel that it keeps test names > more coherent. Hmph, but in the context of a sentence "use an arg as X", we should try to pick a well-known word to describe various Git arguments for X, no? The one you are using, in order to filter the set of commits involved in the operation to those that touch specific set of paths, already has its own established name and the word is "pathspec". So...?
