Hi Hannes,
On Fri, 27 May 2016, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH] rebase -i: remove an unnecessary 'rerere' invocation
>
> Interactive rebase uses 'git cherry-pick' and 'git merge' to replay
> commits. Both invoke the 'rerere' machinery when they fail due to merge
> conflicts. Note that al
Hi David,
On Fri, 27 May 2016, David Kastrup wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > On Fri, 27 May 2016, David Kastrup wrote:
> >
> >> pressure particularly when the history contains lots of merges from
> >> long-diverged branches. In practice, this optimization appears to
> >> behave quit
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 07:02:01AM +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 27.05.16 23:59, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 04:24:20PM +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> >> On 27.05.16 04:27, Mike Hommey wrote:
> >>> Changes from v7:
> >>> - Fixed comments.
> >>>
> >>> Mike Hommey (
On 27.05.16 23:59, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 04:24:20PM +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
>> On 27.05.16 04:27, Mike Hommey wrote:
>>> Changes from v7:
>>> - Fixed comments.
>>>
>>> Mike Hommey (9):
All in all, a great improvement.
2 things left.
- The comment about [] is now st
Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 08:02:36AM +, Eric Wong wrote:
>
> > > That's probably OK in practice, as I think the actual pack-write already
> > > does a linear walk of the object table to generate the pack index. So
> > > presumably nobody checkpoints often enough for it to be
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 04:24:20PM +0200, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 27.05.16 04:27, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > Changes from v7:
> > - Fixed comments.
> >
> > Mike Hommey (9):
> > connect: document why we sometimes call get_port after
> > get_host_and_port
> > connect: call get_host_and_
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Rappazzo writes:
>
>> For those who use two-factor authentication with gmail, git-send-email
>> will not work unless it is setup with an app-specific password. The
>> example for setting up git-send-email for use with gmail will now
Michael Rappazzo writes:
> For those who use two-factor authentication with gmail, git-send-email
> will not work unless it is setup with an app-specific password. The
> example for setting up git-send-email for use with gmail will now
> include information on generating and storing the app-speci
David Kastrup writes:
> Previously, the core part of git blame -M required 1 context line.
> There is no rationale to be found in the code (one guess would be that
> the old blame algorithm was unable to deal with immediately adjacent
> regions), and it causes artifacts like discussed in the thre
For those who use two-factor authentication with gmail, git-send-email
will not work unless it is setup with an app-specific password. The
example for setting up git-send-email for use with gmail will now
include information on generating and storing the app-specific password.
---
Documentation/gi
Thanks, both.
--
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
Samuel GROOT wrote:
> While working on the new option `quote-email`, we needed to parse an
> email file. Since the work is already done, but the parsing and data
> processing are in the same loop, we wanted to refactor the parser, to
> make the code more maintainable.
Thank you for doing this wor
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:58:15PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> > Which perhaps shows that maybe some people would
> > see a performance regression if we moved from /tmp to a slower
> > filesystem (e.g., especially people whose git clone is o
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> Which perhaps shows that maybe some people would
> see a performance regression if we moved from /tmp to a slower
> filesystem (e.g., especially people whose git clone is on NFS or
> something).
Yup, but they would be using "--root" already if
Vasco Almeida writes:
> Às 17:08 de 27-05-2016, Junio C Hamano escreveu:
>> Vasco Almeida writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>>> index 3c6791e..4079fef 100755
>>> --- a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>>> +++ b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>>> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ test_ex
Às 17:08 de 27-05-2016, Junio C Hamano escreveu:
> Vasco Almeida writes:
>
>> diff --git a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>> index 3c6791e..4079fef 100755
>> --- a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>> +++ b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
>> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ test_expect_success 'parse errors in blo
Hey Christian,
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Christian Couder
wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>>
>> Anyone any comments?
>
> Maybe you could add this patch to, or squash it into, the patch that
> convert bisect_clean_state to C.
Sure!
Regards,
Pranit Bauva
>
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 7:57 PM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
>
> Anyone any comments?
Maybe you could add this patch to, or squash it into, the patch that
convert bisect_clean_state to C.
Thanks,
Christian.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to maj
Mike Hommey writes:
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 07:19:16AM -0400, Michael Rappazzo wrote:
>> Executing `git-rev-parse` with `--git-common-dir`, `--git-path `,
>> or `--shared-index-path` from the root of the main worktree results in
>> a relative path to the git dir.
>>
>> When executed from a sub
On 2016-05-27 11:56 AM, Ramsay Jones wrote:
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones
---
Hi Junio,
While reading an email from Linus earlier (RFC: dynamic "auto" date formats),
I noticed that log.decorate was being set to 'auto'. Since I didn't recall
that setting (even if it's easy to guess), I went look
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> I wonder, however, whether it would be "cleaner" to simply make this an
> OPT_STRING and perform the validation after the option parsing.
Yes, I think I touched on this in my comments in a bit more detail.
> Hmm. This change uses up 2 out of 31 available bits. I wo
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Edward Thomson writes:
>
>> However I do not think that this is a common enough action that it needs
>> to be made automatic such that when I `git add foo.rb` it is
>> automatically made executable. I think that the reduced complexity of
>> having a single mechanism to
On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 11:33:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > The only one I can think of is that if something leaves cruft in
> > $TMPDIR, it could affect later tests that want to `git add`
> > indiscriminately.
>
> Or "git ls-files -u", "git clean", etc. I'd mostl
Jordan DE GEA writes:
>>> +test_expect_success '"add" using shorthand - fails when no previous
>>> branch' '
>>> + test_must_fail git worktree add existing -
>>> +'
>>
>> Just an observation, but the error message we would see here might
>> be interesting.
>
> Of course, that’s useful to be s
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Pranit Bauva wrote:
> This is not an improvement in the test coverage but it helps in making
> it explicit as to know what exactly is the error as other tests are
> focussed on testing other things but they do indirectly test for this.
>
> Mentored-by: Lars Schneid
Matthieu Moy writes:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Jordan DE GEA writes:
>>
>>> + branch=$(cd short-hand && git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD) &&
>>> + test "$branch" = refs/heads/newbranch &&
>>> + cd ..
>>
>> If any of the command between "cd short-hand" and "cd .." failed,
>> aft
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:37:16AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Mehul Jain writes:
>
> > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> The only reason why teaching the "--no-show-signature" option to
> >> these commands is a good idea is because it would help people who
> >
Mehul Jain writes:
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> The only reason why teaching the "--no-show-signature" option to
>> these commands is a good idea is because it would help people who
>> create an alias with "--show-sig" in early part of the command line,
>> e.g.
Am 26.05.2016 um 19:05 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
I'd say that these patches are fine as they are, and follow-up patch
for adding -W tests (instead of rerolling them) is sufficient,
though.
Patch 3 needs two small updates to address the char signedness issue
found by Ramsay and to get rid of an u
Take an email message file, parse it and quote the message body.
If `--compose` is set, then it will quote the message in the cover letter.
Otherwise, imply `--annotate` option and put the quoted message in the first
patch after the triple-dash.
Signed-off-by: Tom Russello
Signed-off-by: Samuel
Take an email message file, parse it and fill the "To", "Cc" and
"In-Reply-To" fields appropriately.
If `--compose` option is set, it will also fill the subject field with
"Re: ['s subject]".
Signed-off-by: Tom Russello
Signed-off-by: Samuel Groot
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy
---
As it is said
Hello,
With the current send-email command, you can send a series of patches
"in reply to" an email.
This patch adds a new option to `git send-email`,
`--quote-email=` which does two things:
- set fields appropriately (To, Cc, Subject, In-Reply-To)
- quote the given message
In th
Vasco Almeida writes:
> Marks several messages for translation and updates tests to pass under
> GETTEXT_POISON. Some tests were updated to fit previous i18n marks, others
> were updated to fit marks made by these patches. Patches that only touch
> test file refer to marks done in commits previou
Vasco Almeida writes:
> diff --git a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
> index 3c6791e..4079fef 100755
> --- a/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
> +++ b/t/t1307-config-blob.sh
> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ test_expect_success 'parse errors in blobs are properly
> attributed' '
>
> # just grep f
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Antoine Queru
wrote:
> upload-pack.c: use of parse-options API
Matthieu already mentioned that this should use imperative mood:
upload-pack: use parse-options API
> Option parsing now uses the parser API instead of a local parser.
> Code is now more compact
Vasco Almeida writes:
>>> is_empty_commit() {
>>> - tree=$(git rev-parse -q --verify "$1"^{tree} 2>/dev/null ||
>>> - die "$1: not a commit that can be picked")
>>> - ptree=$(git rev-parse -q --verify "$1"^^{tree} 2>/dev/null ||
>>> + sha1=$1
>>> + tree=$(git rev-parse -q --ver
Hi Johannes,
Thanks for the quick reply! Responses inline below:
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 05:27:14PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2016, Adam Spiers wrote:
>
> > Description
> > ---
> >
> > git-splice(1) non-interactively splices the current branch by removing
> > a
Am 25.05.2016 um 07:38 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
> In short: yes, the explicit `git rerere` call can be dropped, that is
> essentially what I did in the rebase--helper branch.
Here's a patch to do that.
--- 8< ---
Subject: [PATCH] rebase -i: remove an unnecessary 'rerere' invocation
Interacti
Nikolaus Rath writes:
> In Mercurial, this can be done with a more verbose syntax (e.g.
> "last(ancestors(tag("re:release-.*")),3) and descendants(aebeccf)" for
> the above example).
This has no direct equivalent in Git. A lot can be done passing options
to "git rev-list" or so, for example, but
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones
---
Hi Junio,
While reading an email from Linus earlier (RFC: dynamic "auto" date formats),
I noticed that log.decorate was being set to 'auto'. Since I didn't recall
that setting (even if it's easy to guess), I went looking for the documentation
...
This should pr
Hello,
Is there a way to specify revision ranges that has more power than
what's described in gitrevisions(7)?
For example, is there a way to show "the three most recent commits
preceding a tag that starts with "release-" that are also descendants of
commit aebecf."?
In Mercurial, this can be do
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> On Fri, 27 May 2016, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> pressure particularly when the history contains lots of merges from
>> long-diverged branches. In practice, this optimization appears to
>> behave quite benignly,
>
> Why not just stop here?
Because there is a caveat.
Hi Adam,
On Fri, 27 May 2016, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Description
> ---
>
> git-splice(1) non-interactively splices the current branch by removing
> a range of commits from within it and/or cherry-picking a range of
> commits into it. It's essentially just a glorified wrapper around
> cher
Hi David,
it is good practice to Cc: the original author of the code in question, in
this case Junio. I guess he sees this anyway, but that is really just an
assumption.
On Fri, 27 May 2016, David Kastrup wrote:
> When a parent blob already has chunks queued up for blaming, dropping
> the blob a
> Subject: [PATCH v4] upload-pack.c: use of parse-options API
I'd drop the "of" and say just "use parse-options API"
Antoine Queru writes:
> Description for --stateless-rpc and --advertise-refs come from
> the commit 42526b4 (Add stateless RPC options to upload-pack,
Nit: s/the//
> +--adverti
Previously, the core part of git blame -M required 1 context line.
There is no rationale to be found in the code (one guess would be that
the old blame algorithm was unable to deal with immediately adjacent
regions), and it causes artifacts like discussed in the thread
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane
On 27.05.16 04:27, Mike Hommey wrote:
> Changes from v7:
> - Fixed comments.
>
> Mike Hommey (9):
> connect: document why we sometimes call get_port after
> get_host_and_port
> connect: call get_host_and_port() earlier
> connect: re-derive a host:port string from the separate host and po
Option parsing now uses the parser API instead of a local parser.
Code is now more compact.
Description for --stateless-rpc and --advertise-refs come from
the commit 42526b4 (Add stateless RPC options to upload-pack,
receive-pack, 2009-10-30).
Signed-off-by: Antoine Queru
Signed-off-by: Matthieu
Hi all,
I finally got around to implementing a new git subcommand which I've
wanted for quite a while. I've called it git-splice.
Description
---
git-splice(1) non-interactively splices the current branch by removing
a range of commits from within it and/or cherry-picking a range of
com
While working on the new option `quote-email`, we needed to parse an
email file. Since the work is already done, but the parsing and data
processing are in the same loop, we wanted to refactor the parser, to
make the code more maintainable.
This is still WIP, and one of the main issue (and we need
Parsing and processing in send-email is done in the same loop.
To make the code more maintainable, we create two subroutines:
- `parse_email` to separate header and body
- `parse_header` to retrieve data from header
Signed-off-by: Samuel GROOT
Signed-off-by: Tom RUSSELLO
Signed-off-by: Matthieu
Use the two subroutines `parse_email` and `parse_header` introduced in
previous commit to parse patches.
Signed-off-by: Samuel GROOT
Signed-off-by: Tom RUSSELLO
Signed-off-by: Matthieu MOY
---
git-send-email.perl | 179 +---
1 file changed, 59 in
When a parent blob already has chunks queued up for blaming, dropping
the blob at the end of one blame step will cause it to get reloaded
right away, doubling the amount of I/O and unpacking when processing a
linear history.
Keeping such parent blobs in memory seems like a reasonable
optimization.
Hi Junio,
On Thu, 26 May 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > I do not see this patch in 'pu'... Anything I can do to get this into
> > 'master' eventually?
>
> The reason why I left it in my inbox was because I couldn't tell if
> this was a final submission with con
Since `git worktree add` uses `git checkout` when `[]` is used,
and `git checkout -` is already supported, it makes sense to allow the
same shortcut in `git worktree add`.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy
Signed-off-by: Jordan DE GEA
---
Changes since v1:
- improved tests.
- improved documentatio
>> +test_expect_success '"add" using shorthand - fails when no previous branch'
>> '
>> +test_must_fail git worktree add existing -
>> +'
>
> Just an observation, but the error message we would see here might
> be interesting.
Of course, that’s useful to be sure of the error, I will do in ne
Às 22:35 de 26-05-2016, Junio C Hamano escreveu:
> Vasco Almeida writes:
>
>> Helper functions this_nth_commit_message and skip_nth_commit_message
>> replace the previous method of making the comment messages (such as
>> "This is the 2nd commit message:") aided by nth_string helper function.
>> T
Às 22:46 de 26-05-2016, Junio C Hamano escreveu:
> Vasco Almeida writes:
>
>> > require_work_tree_exists () {
>> > + program_name=$0
>> >if test "z$(git rev-parse --is-bare-repository)" != zfalse
>> >then
>> > - die "fatal: $0 cannot be used without a working tree."
>> > +
Às 22:36 de 26-05-2016, Junio C Hamano escreveu:
> Vasco Almeida writes:
>
>> @@ -222,9 +223,10 @@ has_action () {
>> }
>>
>> is_empty_commit() {
>> -tree=$(git rev-parse -q --verify "$1"^{tree} 2>/dev/null ||
>> -die "$1: not a commit that can be picked")
>> -ptree=$(git
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jordan DE GEA writes:
>
>> +branch=$(cd short-hand && git rev-parse --symbolic-full-name HEAD) &&
>> +test "$branch" = refs/heads/newbranch &&
>> +cd ..
>
> If any of the command between "cd short-hand" and "cd .." failed,
> after correcting the broken &&-cha
Samuel GROOT writes:
> On 05/25/2016 08:31 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>> So, a possible UI would be:
>>
>> git send-email --in-reply-to= => just set In-Reply-To: field.
>>
>> git send-email --in-reply-to= => set In-Reply-To, To and Cc.
>>
>> git send-email --in-reply-to= --cite => in addition,
David Aguilar writes:
> Another alternative is that we can compile our own
> "git-readlink" and "git-mktemp" programs and use those instead,
> but that seems like a big maintenance burden compared to the
> relative simplicity of the test-suite workarounds.
Not _that_ big burden as we already hav
Junio C Hamano writes:
> William Duclot writes:
>
>> As the CSS pattern
>> does not deal with letters at all it seemed sensible to me to follow
>> the example of the HTML pattern, which use PATTERNS().
>
> Did you notice that HTML pattern has to do an [Hh] that would be
> unnecessary if it chose
From: "Jordan DE GEA"
We are working on full implementation of triangular workflow feature.
For now, the main options available are:
- branch..pushRemote
- remote.pushDefault
And only setable by hands.
As it can be difficult to understand, here is what we want to do.
Context:
- One main remot
64 matches
Mail list logo
