"Philip Oakley" [off-list ref] writes:
Would this be a good use of the
* Magic pathspecs like ":(icase)
that was recently released (v1.8.5 2Dec13) so that the merge stages
can be named.
Because the pathspec mechahism is for you to tell an operation that
works on a collection of paths (e.g. "all the paths in the HEAD",
"all the paths at stage #1 in the index") to narrow the set it
operates on down to only those that match, I do not think it is a
good match at all to what you are trying to do.
From: "Junio C Hamano" <redacted>, Saturday, December 14, 2013
7:39 PM
"Philip Oakley" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Would this be a good use of the
* Magic pathspecs like ":(icase)
that was recently released (v1.8.5 2Dec13) so that the merge stages
can be named.
Because the pathspec mechahism is for you to tell an operation that
works on a collection of paths (e.g. "all the paths in the HEAD",
"all the paths at stage #1 in the index") to narrow the set it
operates on down to only those that match, I do not think it is a
good match at all to what you are trying to do.
My point was that the ":1:" syntax already was a "path at stage #1 in
the index" indicator, and that it would be good to have a memorable name
for the :1:2:3: stages as per Antoine's query.
It maybe that my referring to it as a 'magic pathspec' was a mistake,
but the difficulty of remembering which number is ours:theirs:base still
stands.
(for general info; the :<stage>: format is defined in 'git revision
(7)' as the last method for Specifying Revisions)
Philip
--
PS should the cc: git-owner@vger.kernel.org be dropped as effectively a
duplicate?
From: "Philip Oakley" <redacted>
From: "Junio C Hamano" <redacted>, Saturday, December 14,
2013 7:39 PM
quoted
"Philip Oakley" [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Would this be a good use of the
* Magic pathspecs like ":(icase)
that was recently released (v1.8.5 2Dec13) so that the merge
stages
can be named.
Because the pathspec mechahism is for you to tell an operation that
works on a collection of paths (e.g. "all the paths in the HEAD",
"all the paths at stage #1 in the index") to narrow the set it
operates on down to only those that match, I do not think it is a
good match at all to what you are trying to do.
My point was that the ":1:" syntax already was a "path at stage #1 in
the index" indicator, and that it would be good to have a memorable
name for the :1:2:3: stages as per Antoine's query.
Could someone point me at where is this syntax decoded?
My initial hunt around the code base didn't find the relevant location.
It maybe that my referring to it as a 'magic pathspec' was a mistake,
but the difficulty of remembering which number is ours:theirs:base
still stands.
(for general info; the :<stage>: format is defined in 'git revision
(7)' as the last method for Specifying Revisions)
Philip
--
Philip