Re: git branch: multiple --merged and --no-merged options?

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 09:46:42PM -0500, Jed Brown wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 02:38:12PM -0500, Jed Brown wrote:

quoted

  $ git branch --no-merged master --merged next

Yeah, sadly that does not work, as we use the same slot for the flag and
store only one of the two (and we also allow only one "--merged" head,
even though you could in theory want to know "merged to X, or merged to
Y").

Hmm, I would have said conjunction (AND) was more natural than
disjunction (OR). If we add support for multiple '--merged' and
'--no-merged', do we expect to eventually have a full query grammar?

Yeah, you might want either. I was just thinking along the lines of the
existing --contains and --points-at (which only tag, not branch, knows
about), both of which OR multiple items. I think you'd want to flesh out
some use cases before deciding.

-Peff