Re: Fix git-rev-parse breakage

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote: > that is not a right thing so get rid of that assumption" (which > I agree is a good change", and the last sentense says > opposite... Well, the patch makes it an _explicit_ assumption, instead of a very subtly hidden one from the code-flow. It was th

Re: Fix git-rev-parse breakage

Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The --flags cleanup caused problems: we used to depend on the fact that > "revs_only" magically suppressed flags, adn that assumption was broken by > the recent fixes. > > It wasn't a good assumption in the first place, so instead of > re-introducing

Re: Fix git-rev-parse breakage

Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This makes "--revs-only" imply "--no-flags". > > [ Side note: we might want to get rid of these confusing two-way flags, > where some flags say "only print xxx", and others say "don't print yyy". > We'd be better off with just three flags that say

Fix git-rev-parse breakage

The --flags cleanup caused problems: we used to depend on the fact that "revs_only" magically suppressed flags, adn that assumption was broken by the recent fixes. It wasn't a good assumption in the first place, so instead of re-introducing it, let's just get rid of it. This makes "--revs-onl