Piotr Krukowiecki <piotr.krukowie...@gmail.com> writes:

> Ignoring (possible) inconsistency thing, I think they are easy to
> understand and use.

Probably you are right (in the sense that I do not offhand think of
a confusing and ambiguous set of positive and negative pathspecs;
others may find holes in my/our thinking).

I am not sure if it will fit well to the current "struct pathspec"
design, though.  We could start from "when there is any negative
pathspec, disable the 'optimize away the common leading prefix'
thing", I guess.

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