Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-15 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On 08/14/2013 09:57 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Sixt writes: > > [SNIP] > >> Stefano's use-case, where @/foo is turned into HEAD/foo, >> indicates a bug. >> >> In my opinion, the topic, which touches a central part of ref >> handling, was a bit hurried (and this report is a symptom of it

Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Johannes Sixt writes: > Am 14.08.2013 20:05, schrieb Junio C Hamano: >> Stefano Lattarini writes: >> >>> My problems is that some new automagical interpretation of the bare >>> @' character (introduced after 1.8.3) has destroyed my use case: >>> ... >>> I don't want to ask you to revert this new

Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-14 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 14.08.2013 20:05, schrieb Junio C Hamano: Stefano Lattarini writes: My problems is that some new automagical interpretation of the bare @' character (introduced after 1.8.3) has destroyed my use case: ... I don't want to ask you to revert this new behaviour, but I'd like to at least have an

Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-14 Thread Stefano Lattarini
[re-sending to the list, sorry Junio for the duplicate mail] On 08/14/2013 07:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefano Lattarini writes: > >> My problems is that some new automagical interpretation of the bare >> @' character (introduced after 1.8.3) has destroyed my use case: >> ... >> I don't wa

Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefano Lattarini writes: > ... But in that case, I'd like some assurance that such a character > is not going to be turned into a magical character some time in the > future ;-) I'd say that any special letter could be considered a fair game by the next person who would want a funky short-cut.

Re: New special handing of '@' character broke my use case

2013-08-14 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefano Lattarini writes: > My problems is that some new automagical interpretation of the bare > @' character (introduced after 1.8.3) has destroyed my use case: > ... > I don't want to ask you to revert this new behaviour, but I'd like to > at least have an option to disable it. I do not think