On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 10:12:07 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 09:40:36 -0400, Augie Fackler wrote: > >> > On Oct 18, 2016, at 09:38, Yuya Nishihara <y...@tcha.org> wrote: > >> >> After coordinating on irc to figure out what this proposal actually > >> >> is, I've noticed that the semantics of this "exact" proposal are > >> >> exactly what "glob" does today, which means (I think) that > >> >> "files:foo/bar" should be representable as "glob:foo/bar/*" - what am > >> >> I missing? > >> > > >> > Maybe we want a "glob" relative to the repo root? > >> > >> As far as I can tell, it already is. "relglob:" is relative to your > >> location in the repo according to the docs. > > > > Unfortunately that isn't. > > > > 'glob:<glob>' - a glob relative to cwd > > 'relglob:<glob>' - an unrooted glob (*.c matches C files in all > > dirs) > > > > Don't ask me why. ;-) > > Oh wat. It looks like narrowhg might change this behavior in narrowed > repositories, thus my additional confusion. > > Maybe we should add "absglob" that is always repo-root-absolute. How > do we feel about that overall?
Sounds good to me. _______________________________________________ Mercurial-devel mailing list Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel