[PATCH V2] lfs: add the '{lfsattrs}' template keyword to '{lfs_files}'
Matt Harbison
mharbison72 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 22 15:21:00 EST 2018
> On Jan 22, 2018, at 12:24 PM, Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz at google.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 10:34 PM, Matt Harbison <mharbison72 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 07:21:30 -0500, Yuya Nishihara <yuya at tcha.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Jan 2018 00:05:42 -0500, Matt Harbison wrote:
>>>>
>>>> # HG changeset patch
>>>> # User Matt Harbison <matt_harbison at yahoo.com>
>>>> # Date 1515967224 18000
>>>> # Sun Jan 14 17:00:24 2018 -0500
>>>> # Node ID fccf09e44f5124abf18ae898fab553ea6d91e951
>>>> # Parent 45b678bf3a787085d56fad5bee494e0c160aa120
>>>> lfs: add the '{lfsattrs}' template keyword to '{lfs_files}'
>>>
>>>
>>> Queued updated version, thanks.
>>>
>>>> I liked {pointer} better, but couldn't make it work with the
>>>> singular/plural
>>>> forms.
>>>
>>>
>>> I think {pointer} is okay here since its singular form is ({key},
>>> {value}).
>>
>>
>> OK, I'll rename after the freeze.
>
> Sorry, I found this discussion only now. I'm a little worried that
> {pointer} is too generic. There's no indication that it has anything
> to do with lfs, and I suppose it does mean that we can't use {pointer}
> for something in core later. If something outside of core would want
> to use use it, that's less of a concern, because that other thing
> could just include a prefix (e.g. {rflpointer} for something in
> remotefilelog). I'm not too worried about it, but I thought I'd
> mention it.
Fair point. The revelation that this could be an attribute of core file templates came late to me. Do you want to try to slip in a rename to “lfs_pointer” or similar before the -rc tag drops? It will be several hours before I can do that.
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list