From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miles Bader Subject: Re: [PATCH] init-db: support --import to add all files and commit right after init Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:09:43 +0900 Message-ID: References: <1237946996-5287-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> <20090325041934.GA15524@coredump.intra.peff.net> Reply-To: Miles Bader Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 31 11:11:42 2009 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 1Loa0O-0003Nx-6O for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 11:11:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755399AbZCaJKB (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 05:10:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755766AbZCaJKA (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 05:10:00 -0400 Received: from TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.206]:51792 "EHLO tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756718AbZCaJJ7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Mar 2009 05:09:59 -0400 Received: from relay21.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.50]) by tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n2V99iCx006871; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:09:44 +0900 (JST) Received: from relay21.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.20] [10.29.19.20]) by relay21.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:09:44 +0900 Received: from dhlpc061 ([10.114.112.72] [10.114.112.72]) by relay21.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:09:44 +0900 Received: by dhlpc061 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 034FE52E26D; Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:09:43 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <20090325041934.GA15524@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:19:35 -0400") Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > I seem to recall that we were phasing out "--long-option " at some > point, and that all long-options should use "--long-option=". But maybe > I am mis-remembering. Surely it should support both where possible, since both are standard syntaxes for passing args to "--"-style long options (so users expect both to work). -Miles -- Occam's razor split hairs so well, I bought the whole argument!