Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> writes:
> On a similar but slightly different note. In general do we want
> the pathspec '??b' to match against the sib/ directory and
> subsequently have ls-files print all entries inside of the sib/
> directory? (this is in the non-recursive case)
I'd need to find time to dig a bit of history before I can give a
firm opinion on this, but here is a knee-jerk version of my reaction.
* A pathspec element that matches literally to a directory causes
itself and everything underneath the directory match that
element, e.g. "sib" would be considered a match.
* Otherwise, a pathspec that matches with the whole path as a
pattern matches the path, e.g. "??b" would match "sib" itself,
but not "sib/file". Note that "??b*" would match "sib" and
"sib/file" because the pattern match is without FNM_PATNAME
unless ':(glob)' magic is in effect.
Historically, some commands treated a pathspec as purely a prefix
match (i.e. the former) and did not use _any_ pattern matching,
while other commands did both of the above two (e.g. compare ls-tree
and ls-files). I thought we were slowly moving towards unifying
them, but apparently 'git log -- "D?cumentation"' does not show
anything close to what 'git log -- Documentation' gives us even in
Probably we want to change it at some point so that a pattern that
matches one leading directory would cause everything underneath to
match, e.g. "??b" would include "sib/file" just because "sib" would.