Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > PS It took me a while to figure out where we document pathspec syntax. I > wonder if a "gitpathspecs" manpage would make sense, like we have > "gitrevisions". Yeah, I came to the same conclusion (should have saved time by scanning the mailing list before I started writing my response) and wondered where we wrote it down. The description you found in the glossary, as far as I recall, is the authoritative one and looks readable, but I agree it is not as discoverable as it should be. A simpler and more readable workaround than ":::file" is "./:file" by the way ;-)
