On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 03:51:41PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jens Lehmann <jens.lehm...@web.de> writes:
> > Am 28.06.2013 20:44, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> >> Heiko Voigt <hvo...@hvoigt.net> writes:
> >> ... 
> >>> Hmm, but does it have a --depth option for revisions? Maybe we should
> >>> call it --clone-depth or --rev-depth to make it clear? --depth and
> >>> --max-depth would be completely orthogonal but the name does not allow
> >>> to distinguish them properly.
> >> 
> >> I do not have a strong opinion either way, but as you suggest, it
> >> might be a good idea to call this new option --clone-depth to be
> >> more specific.
> >
> > No strong opinion here either, but I'm leaning towards "--depth"
> > because on one hand we already have the "--reference" option which
> > is passed on to the clone command (and not "--clone-reference")...
> OK, then "--depth" it is.
> The points in your review on the last version with "--depth" (which
> I picked up and parked on 'pu') still need to be addressed, I think?

I agree, I'm on it

Med vänliga hälsningar
Fredrik Gustafsson

tel: 0733-608274
e-post: iv...@iveqy.com
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to