Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> writes: > On November 3, 2017 8:49:15 PM PDT, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >>Rafael Ascensão <rafa.al...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>Why should this be a special case that burdens users to remember one >>more rule? Wouldn't users find "--decorate-refs=refs/tags" useful >>and it woulld be shorter and nicer than having to say "refs/tags/*"? > > Actually, I would expect these to behave more like git describes > match and exclude which don't have an extra /*. It seems natural > to me that glob would always add an extra glob, but.. I don't > recall if match and exlude do so.
I would have to say that the describe's one is wrong if it does not match what for_each_glob_ref() does for the log family of commands' "--branches=<pattern>" etc. describe.c::get_name() uses positive and negative patterns, just like log-tree.c::add_ref_decoration() would with the patch we are discussing, so perhaps the items in these lists should get the same "normalize" treatment the patch 1/2 of this series brings in to make things consistent? > That being said, if we think the extra glob would not cause > problems and generally do what people mean... I guess consistent > with --glob would be good... But it's definitely not what I'd > expect at first glance. FWIW, what describe --match/--exclude do is not what I'd have expected ;-) In any case, we spotted an existing inconsistency that we would want to resolve (the resolution could be "leave it as-is"; I do not think we have thought this through enough yet), which is good. Thanks.
