From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Globbing for ignored branches? Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 15:48:25 -0500 Message-ID: <20140124204825.GA17167@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20140124090104.GA396@x4> <0C723FEB5B4E5642B25B451BA57E273075148284@S1P5DAG3C.EXCHPROD.USA.NET> <20140124170739.GC396@x4> <20140124170909.GD396@x4> <20140124182341.GB8202@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20140124183222.GE396@x4> <20140124185538.GA9836@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Markus Trippelsdorf , Jim Garrison , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 24 21:48:33 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W6nfz-0007Hg-Rv for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:48:32 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752268AbaAXUs3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jan 2014 15:48:29 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:38375 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751686AbaAXUs1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jan 2014 15:48:27 -0500 Received: (qmail 8440 invoked by uid 102); 24 Jan 2014 20:48:27 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:48:27 -0600 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 24 Jan 2014 15:48:25 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:00:16PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 07:32:22PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > >> > However, you do have to specify each branch individually. You probably > >> > want to say "all branches except X", and you cannot currently specify > >> > a negative refspec like that. > [...] > The end result might be not so hard in the mechanical sense, but > designing the interface would be hard. I do not offhand think of a > good way to do this. I had imagined a "not" token at the front of the refspec, like: git fetch origin +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* ^refs/heads/foo In this case, a colon in the refspec would be an error. An alternative would be: git fetch origin +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* refs/heads/foo: I.e., to say "put foo to nowhere". But generally refspecs do not affect each other. So "refs/heads/foo:refs/heads/bar" would generally work _in addition_ to the other refspec. Making the "null destination" work differently might be confusing. I dunno. I have not thought very hard on the topic, so maybe there are some subtle cases I am missing. -Peff