Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2017, #10; Fri, 24)

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:21 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> * ab/test-readme-updates (2017-03-23) 4 commits
>  - SQUASH???
>  - t/README: clarify the test_have_prereq documentation
>  - t/README: change "Inside <X> part" to "Inside the <X> part"
>  - t/README: link to metacpan.org, not search.cpan.org
>
>  Doc updates.
>
>  Waiting for a reaction to SQUASH???

Sorry about the late reply. That squash looks good to me, please squash it in.

> * ab/doc-submitting (2017-03-21) 3 commits
>  - SQUASH??? remove "alias" thing
>  - doc/SubmittingPatches: show how to get a CLI commit summary
>  - doc/SubmittingPatches: clarify the casing convention for "area: change..."
>
>  Doc update.
>
>  Any further comments?

Squashing that in looks good.

> * ab/ref-filter-no-contains (2017-03-24) 16 commits
>  - tag: add tests for --with and --without
>  - ref-filter: reflow recently changed branch/tag/for-each-ref docs
>  - ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref
>  - tag: change --point-at to default to HEAD
>  - tag: implicitly supply --list given another list-like option
>  - tag: change misleading --list <pattern> documentation
>  - parse-options: add OPT_NONEG to the "contains" option
>  - tag: add more incompatibles mode tests
>  - for-each-ref: partly change <object> to <commit> in help
>  - tag tests: fix a typo in a test description
>  - tag: remove a TODO item from the test suite
>  - ref-filter: add test for --contains on a non-commit
>  - ref-filter: make combining --merged & --no-merged an error
>  - tag doc: reword --[no-]merged to talk about commits, not tips
>  - tag doc: split up the --[no-]merged documentation
>  - tag doc: move the description of --[no-]merged earlier
>
>  "git tag/branch/for-each-ref" family of commands long allowed to
>  filter the refs by "--contains X" (show only the refs that are
>  descendants of X), "--merged X" (show only the refs that are
>  ancestors of X), "--no-merged X" (show only the refs that are not
>  ancestors of X).  One curious omission, "--no-contains X" (show
>  only the refs that are not descendants of X) has been added to
>  them.
>
>  This looks ready for 'next'.  Any comments?

Looks good to me, although I would say that wouldn't I? :)