On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 4:30 PM Jakub Narebski wrote:
>
> Bikeshed painting ahead.
>
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> [...]
> > The problem is we try every possible way to resolve a rev. Let's have
> > some annotation to express that we only want to resolve a rev in a
> > certain way:
> >
> > - @
Bikeshed painting ahead.
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
[...]
> The problem is we try every possible way to resolve a rev. Let's have
> some annotation to express that we only want to resolve a rev in a
> certain way:
>
> - @{hash} only accepts a full hash or a short hash. If it's a
> short hash,
Duy Nguyen writes:
> If refs/heads/master does _not_ exist, then ref/heads/master can
> resolve to refs/heads/refs/heads/master, which I think is unexpected.
> "ref not found" error or something should be returned instead.
Ah, that was what I missed. Thanks.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 1:51 AM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > - @{literal} only accepts full ref. No turning "master" into
> > "refs/heads/master".
>
> This is already doable by saying "refs/heads/master", isn't it? Any
> ambiguous ones like a branch or a tag whose name is 'refs/heads/master'
> (i.
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> The problem is we try every possible way to resolve a rev. Let's have
> some annotation to express that we only want to resolve a rev in a
> certain way:
>
> - @{hash} only accepts a full hash or a short hash. If it's a
> short hash, it cannot be ambiguous.
This
[I feel like this is something we should do, but I'm not sure. Hence
RFC. The patch is mostly to play with if you're curious. The die() thing
there is definitely wrong. And yeah all the syntax names are
placeholders.]
get_oid() is flexible and accepts multiple SHA-1 sources. Sometimes this
flexibi
6 matches
Mail list logo
