From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C7A1F6C1 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 19:00:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756255AbcHXTAo (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:00:44 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:60684 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754056AbcHXTAm (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:00:42 -0400 Received: (qmail 16774 invoked by uid 109); 24 Aug 2016 18:34:01 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 18:34:01 +0000 Received: (qmail 5670 invoked by uid 111); 24 Aug 2016 18:34:05 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:34:05 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:33:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:33:58 -0400 From: Jeff King To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=98ystein?= Walle Cc: Karthik Nayak , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] for-each-ref: add %(upstream:gone) to mark missing refs Message-ID: <20160824183358.ahxcgcrg7jo2rygp@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160822173528.755-1-oystwa@gmail.com> <20160824180730.mqlvhkthg4imd2vy@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 08:26:26PM +0200, Øystein Walle wrote: > In the mean time, however, I have discovered that this conflicts with > kn/ref-filter-branch-list in pu. In that topic this specific feature is > implemented as well. They incorporate it into %(upstream:track) instead > of having a separate "sub-atom" (what's the correct nomenclature, by the > way?) more in line with with branch -vv and your idea. Ah, right. I was feeling like this was all vaguely familiar. I think it would be better to push forward kn/ref-filter-branch-list. According to the last "what's cooking", I think that topic is waiting on more review. If you're willing and able to do so, that would be a big help. Thanks. -Peff