On Wed, 14 Jun 2017 11:19:56 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > > > On Jun 14, 2017, at 10:17, Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 18:50:27 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > >> Durham had the idea of a tweak to patchbomb that would let us not do > >> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/Herald. > >> > >> I implemented filesets for the RFC, but I think we should probably also > >> allow reset-based subscriptions too (e.g. "histedit" as a keyword or > >> similar). I'd appreciate any feedback people have, since this was a quick > >> project and it feels like it might have some real utility. > > > > Looks pretty nice. > > > >>> @@ -3036,12 +3036,17 @@ Test hg email defaults settings: > >>>> [devel.setsubscriptions] > >>>> c or d = c-o...@example.com > >>>> a or b = a-o...@example.com > >>> + > [foo.setsubscriptions] > >>> + > binary() = hates-binary-fi...@example.com > > > > Perhaps the config syntax could be arbitrary_key:attr = value. > > > > hatebin:fileset = binary() > > hatebin:revset = keyword(binary) > > hatebin:cc = hates-binary-fi...@example.com > > Hmm. This feels a little quirky to me somehow (though it's in-line with how > we handle them in config files generally). Could we instead do something like > this? > > > [devel] > > to = de...@example.com > > cc = always...@example.com > > > > [devel.hatebin] > > fileset = binary() > > revset = keyword(binary) > > cc = hates-binary-fi...@example.com > > > > [devel.a-or-b] > > fileset = a or b > > cc = a-o...@example.com > > That looks a little cleaner to me, but I don't feel especially strongly. Just > seems like we may as well use the fact that we're not in a main config file > to our advantage and use sections in a slightly clearer way...
This seems also good. I don't have strong opinion about :attr syntax, which would be good for consistency with the main config, but implementation-wise it isn't pretty. > > fileset and revset can be quite long. We wouldn't want to write them as > > config > > keys. > > > > And I prefer using matcher patterns instead of fileset for consistency with > > the other commands. > > Should we name it `files` then, and if people want to use a set they can do > the set: thing in-situ? That's fine with me (I just find filesets to be the > best thing). > > I can also add the revset match flavor, that seems nice. Yeah, and 'revset' could be called as 'revs', too. _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
