Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH] tag: Implicitly supply --list given another list-like option

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Junio: This will merge conflict with my in-flight --no-contains
>> patch. I can re-send either one depending on which you want to accept
>> first, this patch will need an additional test for --no-contains. I
>> just wanted to get this on the ML for review before the --no-contains
>> patch hit "master".

I haven't looked at the patch text of this one closely yet, but I
think the goals of both make sense, so we would eventually want to
have them both.

I also think that "if you said --contains, --merged, etc. you are
already asking to give you a list and cannot be creating a new one",
which is the topic of this patch, makes sense even if nobody were
interested in asking "--no-contains".

So perhaps you would want this applied first, so that existing three
can already benefit from "implicit --list" before waiting for the
other one?