On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 01:19:46PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > So I still feel that "-s subtree=<blabla>,recursive=theirs" would be a > viable way to go. And more intuitive than "-X". > > I'll just ask Miklos what he thinks of the idea, and to write the patch if > he likes it, once he's back from the saddle. :-) I think there are three steps here. First, currently you can specify multiple strategies in the config (pull.twohead, pull.octopus) using a space separated list. If we want to change it to a coma-separated list, should we care about backwards compatibility? There are tests for this, but it's undocumented (and my patch to document it was rejected, saying we should not encourage people to use it). Second, we could allow custom strategies, as we started to discuss here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/86584/focus=87684 Third, it would be nice to allow passing extra parameter(s) to the backends, but I do not know what concept is the best here. The strategy1=foo,stategy2=bar limits the input to a single string. Is that enough? Given that recursive=theirs was considered harmful, we don't have too much examples; for subtree the only parameter I could think of is the path, so a string there is enough. However, further strategies, like blame, could take more parameters, like git blame -C<num> -M<othernum>. Or do I just overcomplicate it? ;-)
Attachment:
pgpNLihQEHmqB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
