Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] rev-list: implement object type filter

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 15:06:10 -0700

Jeff King <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Furthermore, the filter also allows future iterations which build on top
>> of this. If we had a combined OR filter in addition to the existing
>> combined AND filter, the user could say "Give me all blobs which aren't
>> bigger than a specific size PLUS all trees with a depth smaller than 5
>> PLUS all commits and tags". It's not like I'd know of a specific usecase
>> for this right now, but I think the potential of having such filters in
>> the future is a plus.
>
> Yeah, that's true. My biggest complaint is lack of an OR filter, but we
> could add that later. And then we would be _more_ flexible, as you note,
> since we could and/or more filters.
>
> So I'm OK proceeding with this direction.

I think the only remaining issues are the comments on 5/8 on tests,
then?  Hopefully we can have one more iteration to finalize the
topic and merge it down to 'next'?

Thanks.