Re: [RFC] Hidden refs

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [RFC] Hidden refs

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:49:46

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
Yeah, I believe "." at the front of a directory component is explicitly
forbidden by check_ref_format. I don't recall whether there was a
specific rationale, or whether it was simply a can of worms we didn't
want to explore.
Is "log foo...bar" a symmetric difference between foo and bar, or is it an
assymmetric one from foo and .bar?

Re: [RFC] Hidden refs

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:49:46

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 10:42:41AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Yeah, I believe "." at the front of a directory component is explicitly
forbidden by check_ref_format. I don't recall whether there was a
specific rationale, or whether it was simply a can of worms we didn't
want to explore.
Is "log foo...bar" a symmetric difference between foo and bar, or is it an
assymmetric one from foo and .bar?
Thanks, I was sure there was a simple example of how it would make
things ambiguous, but for some reason I couldn't think of one.

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help