Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> writes: >> If you see here, we detect "track" first for >> %(upstream:track,nobracket) > > Yes, but I still think that this was a bad idea. If you want > nobracket to apply to "track", then the syntax should be > %(upstream:track=nobracket). I think the "nobracket" should apply > to "upstream" (i.e. be global to the atom), hence > %(upstream:nobracket,track) and %(upstream:track,nobracket) should > both be accepted.
That makes sense to me, as I think what is being discussed would be %(upstream:track=yes,bracket=no) when it is fully spelled out. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
