From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] completion: add missing configuration variables Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:23:04 -0500 Message-ID: <20101216042304.GA886@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1292395613-12859-1-git-send-email-martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com> <20101215130046.GB25647@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Martin von Zweigbergk X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 16 05:23:53 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PT5Ng-0000dj-UX for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 05:23:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751257Ab0LPEXK (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:23:10 -0500 Received: from xen6.gtisc.gatech.edu ([143.215.130.70]:38117 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751022Ab0LPEXI (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:23:08 -0500 Received: (qmail 29494 invoked by uid 111); 16 Dec 2010 04:23:06 -0000 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (99.108.226.0) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 04:23:06 +0000 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 15 Dec 2010 23:23:04 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 08:44:45PM +0100, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote: > > One note: > > > > > color.diff > > > color.diff.commit > > > color.diff.frag > > > + color.diff.func > > > color.diff.meta > > > color.diff.new > > > color.diff.old > > > color.diff.plain > > > color.diff.whitespace > > > > We have color.diff.branch coming soon (I think it is in 'next' now). > > Strictly speaking, that note is for Junio to think of when he merges, > right? But adding it early is pretty harmless and if that relieves him > of some work, I would be happy to add it in the next submission of > this patch. Is that better? > > Thinking a bit more, maybe what you are suggesting is that I base the > next revision of this patch on the branch that adds that variable? The "correct" thing to do from a topic branch standpoint is to submit this patch without it as its own topic, submit a patch with just color.diff.branch on top of the other topic, and then the merge resolution will include both sets. In this case, it might be OK to just start shipping color.diff.branch in the completion list. It doesn't hurt anything to have the extra completion before the feature is in, and the feature seems very likely to make it in soon. But I'll let Junio decide how meticulous about history he wants to be. :) -Peff