From 31ead4f0f3c385de3fdfc84001854602bcb06645 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:17:39 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] comment --- ...1_90b435a6fa0f22df23e82b65af58f742._comment | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/todo/git-annex-get_--batch_--key/comment_1_90b435a6fa0f22df23e82b65af58f742._comment diff --git a/doc/todo/git-annex-get_--batch_--key/comment_1_90b435a6fa0f22df23e82b65af58f742._comment b/doc/todo/git-annex-get_--batch_--key/comment_1_90b435a6fa0f22df23e82b65af58f742._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..3f8a87f40a --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/todo/git-annex-get_--batch_--key/comment_1_90b435a6fa0f22df23e82b65af58f742._comment @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 1""" + date="2019-09-18T17:07:56Z" + content=""" +--key can't be reused for another meaning like this, it would make "--key +foo" be ambiguous. + +It would need to be some other option, --batch-key or whatever. + +Adding this would seem to open the door to adding it to every command that +supports --batch now. I'm unsure if the added complexity justifies it. + +I'd be more sanguine if there were a way to reuse the existing batch +machinery and apply it to keys. But many commands' --batch honor file +matching options (eg --copies or --include), and that cannot be done when +using keys. +"""]]