From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Roskin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support tags in uncommit - use git_id instead of rev_parse Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:03:11 -0400 Message-ID: <1191362591.26879.3.camel@dv> References: <20070930172647.18972.49369.stgit@tt.roinet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Catalin Marinas X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 03 00:03:36 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Icpq3-0002qv-Iy for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:03:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753612AbXJBWD1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 18:03:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753498AbXJBWD1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 18:03:27 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:60945 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752478AbXJBWD0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 18:03:26 -0400 Received: from proski by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Icpp5-0008Vu-6p for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:02:35 -0400 Received: from proski by gnu.org with local (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1Icppg-0007OF-5i; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 18:03:12 -0400 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-4.fc7) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 2007-10-01 at 23:00 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 30/09/2007, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Pavel Roskin > > With this patch, uncommit can take patch names (with modifiers) as the > --to argument. When would this be needed? Probably never. > To allow tags, maybe just pass something like > "git.rev_parse(options.to + '^{commit}')" or just modify git.rev_parse > to do it (and git_id to avoid it). I prefer to work with software that understands what I mean and tells me that I cannot do it. It makes it easier to understand what is possible and how the command is working. Recognizing patch names in some commands but not others would be annoying and inconsistent. Dumbing downs interactive software on purpose is probably not worth the trouble. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin