On 2008-06-16 14:30:32 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> What about supporting patch ranges with the new id format, something
> like:
>
> branch:patch1..patch2,patch3
>
> or
>
> branch:patch1..patch2 branch:patch3
Yes, that's a good idea; the endpoints of a range have to be on the
same branch no matter what, so having the branch: prefix apply to both
of the endpoint patches in "branch:patch1..patch2" is a good idea.
I'm not sure if the comma notation is worth it. And if it turns out to
have been useful, we can just advise users to write
$ stg foo branch:{p1..p2,p3}
which the shell will expand to
$ stg foo branch:p1..p2 branch:p3
> This way we could get rid of many --branch options.
Indeed.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
