Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] writes:
Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
quoted
These probably could have been one patch, since the function
is introduced only to support this one usage, and this patch
is only 4 lines larger than the function definition anyway...
Seeing that this hasn't been picked up yet, I'm fine with this being
squashed into one commit. Could you use this combination of the two
messages for the commit?
---8<----
Subject: completion: complete config variables for
--get/getall/unset/unset-all
Hmm, shouldn't this just be
Subject: completion: complete variable names for "git config" command
?
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
quoted
These probably could have been one patch, since the function
is introduced only to support this one usage, and this patch
is only 4 lines larger than the function definition anyway...
Seeing that this hasn't been picked up yet, I'm fine with this being
squashed into one commit. Could you use this combination of the two
messages for the commit?
---8<----
Subject: completion: complete config variables for
--get/getall/unset/unset-all
Hmm, shouldn't this just be
Subject: completion: complete variable names for "git config" command
?
This patch adds completion for set variable names when --get,
--get-all, --set, or --set-all has been specified. Completion of
variable names for git config already exists. Maybe this would be more
clear:
Subject: completion: complete set variable names for git config
--get/get-all/set-set-all