Duy Nguyen writes:
> I don't object the alias.. approach though. It's
> definitely a cleaner one in my opinion. It just needs people who can
> spend time to follow up until the end. But if someone decides to do
> that now, I'll drop the "(properties)!command" and try to support
> him/her.
I don'
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:44:50AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> > Yeah, that's reasonable, too. So:
>> >
>> > [alias]
>> > d2u = "!dos2unix"
>> >
>> > acts exactly as if:
>> >
>> > [alias "d2u"]
>> > command = dos2unix
>> >
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 11:44:50AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Yeah, that's reasonable, too. So:
> >
> > [alias]
> > d2u = "!dos2unix"
> >
> > acts exactly as if:
> >
> > [alias "d2u"]
> > command = dos2unix
> > type = shell
> >
> > was specified at that point, which
W dniu 11.10.2016 o 13:51, SZEDER Gábor pisze:
> Quoting Duy Nguyen :
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Jakub Narębski wrote:
>>> W dniu 07.10.2016 o 16:19, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
>>>
> Note that we would have to teach git completion about n
Quoting Duy Nguyen :
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Jakub Narębski wrote:
W dniu 07.10.2016 o 16:19, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
Note that we would have to teach git completion about new syntax;
or new configuration variable if we go that route.
Hi Duy,
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 06:32:38PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> >>
> >> > > If you mean ambiguity between the old "alias.X" and the n
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 06:32:38PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>>
>> > > If you mean ambiguity between the old "alias.X" and the new "alias.X.*",
>> > > then yes, I think that's an unavoida
Hi,
On Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 06:32:38PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>
> > > If you mean ambiguity between the old "alias.X" and the new "alias.X.*",
> > > then yes, I think that's an unavoidable part of the transition. IMHO,
> > > the new should take precedenc
Jeff King writes:
> ... My main motive in switching to the
> "alias.$cmd.key" syntax is that it fixes the ancient mistake of putting
> arbitrary content into the key (just like pager.*, as we've discussed
> elsewhere).
Yup, we are on the same page. It's not too grave a mistake (we said
"these a
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:52:26AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > Having separate exec/shell boolean options just punts the overlap from
> > the command key to those keys. If you have two mutually exclusive
> > options, I think the best thing is a single option, like:
> >
Jeff King writes:
> Having separate exec/shell boolean options just punts the overlap from
> the command key to those keys. If you have two mutually exclusive
> options, I think the best thing is a single option, like:
>
> type =
>
> and then it is obvious that a second appearance of "type" ov
On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 06:32:38PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > If you mean ambiguity between the old "alias.X" and the new "alias.X.*",
> > then yes, I think that's an unavoidable part of the transition. IMHO,
> > the new should take precedence over the old, and people will gradually
> > move fr
On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 10:36:13AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> > > Maybe it's time to aim for
>> > >
>> > > git config alias.d2u.shell \
>> > >'f() { git ls-files "$@" | xargs dos2unix; }; f'
>> > > git config alias.d2u.cdup
On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 10:36:13AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > Maybe it's time to aim for
> > >
> > > git config alias.d2u.shell \
> > >'f() { git ls-files "$@" | xargs dos2unix; }; f'
> > > git config alias.d2u.cdup false
> > > git d2u *.c # yada!
> >
> > That would
On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 02:01:49AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> > So what about this?
> >
> > [alias]
> > d2u = !dos2unix
> > [alias "d2u"]
> > shell = 'f() { git ls-files "$@" | xargs dos2unix; }; f'
> > exec = C:/cygwin64/bin/dos2unix.exe
> >
> > You in
Hi Peff & Hannes,
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 07:42:35PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>
> > Maybe it's time to aim for
> >
> > git config alias.d2u.shell \
> >'f() { git ls-files "$@" | xargs dos2unix; }; f'
> > git config alias.d2u.cdup false
> >
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Jakub Narębski wrote:
> W dniu 07.10.2016 o 16:19, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
>> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
>
>>> Note that we would have to teach git completion about new syntax;
>>> or new configuration variable if we go that route.
>>
>> Why would
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 07:42:35PM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Maybe it's time to aim for
>
> git config alias.d2u.shell \
>'f() { git ls-files "$@" | xargs dos2unix; }; f'
> git config alias.d2u.cdup false
> git d2u *.c # yada!
That would be nice. It would also allow "alias.fo
Am 07.10.2016 um 14:27 schrieb Duy Nguyen:
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
Hi Junio,
On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
interested.
Current '!' aliases move cwd to
W dniu 07.10.2016 o 16:19, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
>> Note that we would have to teach git completion about new syntax;
>> or new configuration variable if we go that route.
>
> Why would we? Git's completion does not expand aliases, it only complet
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> Hi Matthieu,
>
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>
>> Another possibility: !(nocd), which leaves room
>> for !(keyword1,keyword2,...) if needed later. Also, it is consistent
>> with the :(word) syntax of pathspecs.
>
> But is this backwards-compatible? Don't
Hi Kuba,
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Jakub Narębski wrote:
> W dniu 07.10.2016 o 13:20, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
> > On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> >>
> >>> Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
> >>> interested.
> >>>
> >>> Current
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 04:11:34PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Possibly a better idea would be to use *another* special symbol, one that
> makes intuitive sense as a modifier, such as:
>
> [alias]
> # This works as before
> xyz = !pwd
> # As
Hi Matthieu,
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Duy Nguyen writes:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> > wrote:
> >> Hi Junio,
> >>
> >> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >>
> >>> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> >>>
> >>> > Throwing something at the ma
Hi Duy,
On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> >>
> >> > Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
> >> > interested.
> >> >
Hello, Johannes
W dniu 07.10.2016 o 13:20, Johannes Schindelin pisze:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
>>
>>> Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
>>> interested.
>>>
>>> Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which
Duy Nguyen writes:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> wrote:
>> Hi Junio,
>>
>> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>>> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
>>>
>>> > Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
>>> > interested.
>>> >
>>> > Current '!' ali
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Matthieu Moy
wrote:
> Duy Nguyen writes:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Junio,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> Throwing something at the mailing list t
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
> Hi Junio,
>
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
>>
>> > Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
>> > interested.
>> >
>> > Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE fir
Hi Junio,
On Thu, 6 Oct 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
>
> > Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
> > interested.
> >
> > Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which could make
> > handling path arguments hard because they are
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 03:00:14PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> PS I think your "!!" syntax conflicts with something like:
>
> git -c alias.has-changes='!! git diff --quiet' has-changes
>
>I don't know if that is worth worrying about or not. I also notice
>that using "!!git diff" with n
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 06:41:24PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
> interested.
>
> Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which could make
> handling path arguments hard because they are relative to the original
> c
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
> Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
> interested.
>
> Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which could make
> handling path arguments hard because they are relative to the original
> cwd. We set GIT_PREFIX to work around it,
Throwing something at the mailing list to see if anybody is
interested.
Current '!' aliases move cwd to $GIT_WORK_TREE first, which could make
handling path arguments hard because they are relative to the original
cwd. We set GIT_PREFIX to work around it, but I still think it's more
natural to kee
34 matches
Mail list logo
