Re: [PATCH 2/2] pathspec: don't error out on all-exclusionary pathspec patterns

On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Thanks. Even though the current code does not refer to the original > prefixlen after the added hunk, I'd prefer not to destroy it to > avoid future troubles, so I'll queue with a bit of tweak there, > perhaps like the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] pathspec: don't error out on all-exclusionary pathspec patterns

Linus Torvalds writes: > @@ -546,10 +546,16 @@ void parse_pathspec(struct pathspec *pathspec, > pathspec->magic |= item[i].magic; > } > > - if (nr_exclude == n) > - die(_("There is nothing to exclude from by :(exclude) >

Re: [PATCH 2/2] pathspec: don't error out on all-exclusionary pathspec patterns

Again, as Duy pointed out this should be documented. How about something like this: diff --git a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt index f127fe9..781cde3 100644 --- a/Documentation/glossary-content.txt +++ b/Documentation/glossary-content.txt @@ -387,7

[PATCH 2/2] pathspec: don't error out on all-exclusionary pathspec patterns

From: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 21:08:15 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] pathspec: don't error out on all-exclusionary pathspec patterns Instead of erroring out and telling the user that they should add a positive pattern that covers everything else