From: David Pursehouse
Add missing `::` after the title.
Signed-off-by: David Pursehouse
---
Documentation/config.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
index 1fee83ca4..6c378c6fc 100644
--- a/Documentation/co
From: David Pursehouse
Fixes a minor glitch in the formatting of the documentation.
David Pursehouse (1):
config.txt: Fix formatting of submodule.alternateErrorStrategy section
Documentation/config.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.11.1
"Philip Oakley" writes:
> For an integrator, or especially a CI tool, simply checking the second
> parents of each topic merge (post fail) should at least indicate if
> the basics of the feature actually passed the tests, though it doesn't
> check for interaction issues. This could give direct au
Redraw the ASCII art describing the setup using more space, such that
it is easier to understand. The leaf commits are now ordered the same
way the actual code is ordered.
Add empty lines to the setup code separating each of the leaf commits,
each starting with a "checkout -b".
Signed-off-by: St
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
Documentation/git-checkout.txt | 7 +++
builtin/checkout.c | 28
t/lib-submodule-update.sh | 33 -
t/t2013-checkout-submodule.sh | 5 +
4 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 9 de
The check (which uses the old oid) is yet to be implemented, but this part
is just a refactor, so it can go separately first.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
unpack-trees.c | 17 ++---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
ind
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
unpack-trees.c | 98 --
unpack-trees.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
index 616a0ae4b2..40af8e9b5f 100644
--- a/unpack-trees.c
+++ b/un
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
read-cache.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c
index 9054369dd0..b78a7f02e3 100644
--- a/read-cache.c
+++ b/read-cache.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
#include "varint.h"
#include "split-index.h"
#include "utf8.h"
+#include
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
entry.c | 28
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
diff --git a/entry.c b/entry.c
index c6eea240b6..ae40611c97 100644
--- a/entry.c
+++ b/entry.c
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
#include "blob.h"
#include "dir.h"
#include "streaming.h"
+#include "subm
In a later patch we need to prepare the submodule environment with
another git directory, so split up the function.
Also move it up in the file such that we do not need to declare the
function later before using it.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
submodule.c | 29 +
We need the gentle version in a later patch. As we have just one caller,
migrate the caller.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
builtin/grep.c | 2 +-
submodule.c| 7 ++-
submodule.h| 8 +++-
3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/grep.c b/builtin/g
In later patches we introduce the options and flag for commands
that modify the working directory, e.g. git-checkout.
This piece of code will be used universally for
all these working tree modifications as it
* supports dry run to answer the question:
"Is it safe to change the submodule to this
Similar to b33a15b08 (push: add recurseSubmodules config option,
2015-11-17) and 027771fcb1 (submodule: allow erroneous values for the
fetchRecurseSubmodules option, 2015-08-17), we add submodule-config code
that is later used to parse whether we are interested in updating
submodules.
We need the
In later patches we introduce the options and flag for commands
that modify the working directory, e.g. git-checkout.
Have a central place to store such settings whether we want to update
a submodule.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
submodule.c | 6 ++
submodule.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 7
Currently lib-submodule-update.sh provides 2 functions
test_submodule_switch and test_submodule_forced_switch that are used by a
variety of tests to ensure that submodules behave as expected. The current
expected behavior is that submodules are not touched at all (see
42639d2317a for the exact setu
In later patches we introduce the --recurse-submodule flag for commands
that modify the working directory, e.g. git-checkout.
It is potentially expensive to check if a submodule needs an update,
because a common theme to interact with submodules is to spawn a child
process for each interaction.
S
In a later patch we'll use connect_work_tree_and_git_dir when the
directory for the gitlink file doesn't exist yet. Safely create
the directory first.
One of the two users of 'connect_work_tree_and_git_dir' already checked
for the directory being there, so we can loose that check.
Signed-off-by:
previous work:
https://public-inbox.org/git/20161203003022.29797-1-sbel...@google.com/
v4:
* addressed all comments of Brian, Junio and Brandon.
Thanks!
* one major point of change is the introduction of another patch
"lib-submodule-update.sh: do not use ./. as submodule remote",
as that
Adding the repository itself as a submodule does not make sense in the
real world. In our test suite we used to do that out of convenience in
some tests as the current repository has easiest access for setting up
'just a submodule'.
However this doesn't quite test the real world, so let's do not f
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 6:08 PM, brian m. carlson
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 04:34:23PM -0800, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> +--[no-]recurse-submodules::
>> + Using --recurse-submodules will update the content of all initialized
>> + submodules according to the commit recorded in the super
From: Jacob Keller
It is often useful to break a commit into multiple parts that are more
logical separations. This can be tricky to learn how to do without the
brute-force method if re-writing code or commit messages from scratch.
Add a section to the git-reset documentation which shows an exam
"Philip Oakley" writes:
> It may even be worth 'splitting' the pu branch sequence into the
> existing pu (with merges from series that are selected as reasonable),
> and then a pr branch (public review?) on top of that holding the rest
> of the series that have been submitted, so that the CI can
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 02:50:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > That works, but the fact that we need a comment is a good sign that it's
> > kind of gross. It's too bad stdio does not specify the return of fclose
> > to report an error in the close _or_ any previous error. I guess we
> > could
From: "Johannes Schindelin"
Hi Philip,
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Philip Oakley wrote:
From: "Christian Couder"
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Junio C Hamano
> wrote:
> > Johannes Schindelin writes:
> >
> > > On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > >
> > > > Johannes Schindelin writ
Ahh, that would work, too.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Stefan Beller writes:
>>
>>> Yes; though I'd place it in strbuf.{c,h} as it is operating
>>> on the internals of the strbuf. (Do we make any promises outs
The "git -c = cmd" mechanism is to pretend that a
configuration variable is set to while the cmd is
running. The code to do so however downcased in its entirety,
which is wrong for a three-level ...
The part needs to stay as-is.
Reported-by: Lars Schneider
Diagnosed-by: Jonathan Tan
Signed
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> Yes; though I'd place it in strbuf.{c,h} as it is operating
>> on the internals of the strbuf. (Do we make any promises outside of
>> strbuf about the internals? I mean we use .buf all the time, so maybe
>> I am o
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:36 PM, G. Sylvie Davies
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a script that runs the following sequence of commands within a clone:
>
> -
> /usr/bin/git rebase --abort (took 148ms)
> /usr/bin/git cherry-pick --abort (took 103ms)
Is there more happening before?
> /usr/bin/git cle
Stefan Beller writes:
> Yes; though I'd place it in strbuf.{c,h} as it is operating
> on the internals of the strbuf. (Do we make any promises outside of
> strbuf about the internals? I mean we use .buf all the time, so maybe
> I am overly cautious here)
I'd rather have it not use struct strbuf
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
>> FWIW I wish it were different, that git.git's `master` reflected more
>> closely what the current Git for Windows version has.
>
> Well, we two wishing the same thing together without doing anything
> else would make it happen.
ehh, woul
[sorry for the repeated emails - I'd prepared it off line, and then suffered
a number of auto send actions]
From: "Junio C Hamano"
"Philip Oakley" writes:
In the next..pu case the abstraction is in the other direction, we
have potentially multiple points of infection (from feature branches),
On 02/15/2017 03:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Junio C Hamano writes:
Perhaps something like this?
This looks good. I was hoping to unify the processing logic between this
CLI parsing and the usual stream parsing, but this approach is probably
simpler.
config.c | 16 +++-
1 f
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Jonathan Tan writes:
>>
>>> I had some time to look into this, and yes, command-line parameters
>>> are too aggressively downcased ("git_config_parse_parameter" calls
>>> "strbuf_tolower" on the entire key part
Stefan Beller writes:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Stefan Beller writes:
>>
>>> In a later patch we'll use connect_work_tree_and_git_dir when the
>>> directory for the gitlink file doesn't exist yet. Safely create
>>> the directory first.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: S
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jonathan Tan writes:
>
>> I had some time to look into this, and yes, command-line parameters
>> are too aggressively downcased ("git_config_parse_parameter" calls
>> "strbuf_tolower" on the entire key part in config.c).
>
> Ahh, thanks. So this is not about submodules
Jonathan Tan writes:
> I had some time to look into this, and yes, command-line parameters
> are too aggressively downcased ("git_config_parse_parameter" calls
> "strbuf_tolower" on the entire key part in config.c).
Ahh, thanks. So this is not about submodules at all; it is -c var=VAL
where var
On 02/15/2017 10:53 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Lars Schneider writes:
It looks like as if submodule configs ("submodule.*") for submodules
with upper case names are ignored.
This observation is surprising, as the second level in three-level
names like ".." is designed to be case
sensitive. A
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> In a later patch we'll use connect_work_tree_and_git_dir when the
>> directory for the gitlink file doesn't exist yet. Safely create
>> the directory first.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
>
> Among the exist
Jeff King writes:
> Good catch. I think we use a nasty bitwise-OR elsewhere to do that.
> Ah, here it is, in tempfile.c:
>
> /*
> * Note: no short-circuiting here; we want to fclose()
> * in any case!
> */
> err =
On 02/15/2017 03:26 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:24 PM, wrote:
>
>> + *)
>> + __git_complete_tree_file "$ref" "$cur"
>> + ;;
>
> There is one more caveat here.
>
> Both our __git_complete_index_file() and Bash's
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> We need the gentle version in a later patch. As we have just one caller,
>> migrate the caller.
>
> Ordinarily, we keep the original helper implemented as a thin
> wrapper that passes NULL as retun_error_code, wh
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 02:28:10PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> >> abort:
> >>strbuf_release(¬e);
> >>free(url);
> >> - fclose(fp);
> >> + if (ferror(fp))
> >> + rc = -1;
> >> + if (fclose(fp))
> >> + rc = -1;
> >>return rc;
> >
> > Yeah
Jeff King writes:
>> abort:
>> strbuf_release(¬e);
>> free(url);
>> -fclose(fp);
>> +if (ferror(fp))
>> +rc = -1;
>> +if (fclose(fp))
>> +rc = -1;
>> return rc;
>
> Yeah, I think this works. Normally you'd want to flush before checking
> ferror
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> Hi Junio,
> ...
> The hat of a person who sees how patches are reviewed before they enter
> pu/next/master/maint of git.git.
> ...
> make sense. This makes my life harder, but I believe that the alternative
> would be *not* to have those patches in git.git *at all*.
From: "Junio C Hamano"
"Philip Oakley" writes:
There are also a few ideas at the SO answers:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/5652323/717355
I vaguely recall that I saw somebody said the same "mark tips of
topics as good" on the list and answered with why it does not quite
work, though.
I think
From: "Junio C Hamano"
"Philip Oakley" writes:
There are also a few ideas at the SO answers:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/5652323/717355
I vaguely recall that I saw somebody said the same "mark tips of
topics as good" on the list and answered with why it does not quite
work, though.
I think
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:51:30PM +, Fabrizio Cucci wrote:
> > Some people use the matched backtick/single-quote to emulate the
> > non-symmetric start/end quotes used in traditional typography (and in
> > fact, ``foo'' in languages like asciidoc are typically rendered using
> > smart-quotes)
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 01:50:07PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > I see the patches are marked for 'next' in the latest What's Cooking.
> > If it is not too late in today's integration cycle, here is a re-roll of
> > patch 3 that squashes in Pranit's suggestion (if it is
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 01:47:23PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 05:37:30PM +0100, Jáchym Barvínek wrote:
> > If FETCH_HEAD failed to write because of a full disk (or any other
> > reason), then the right thing is for "git fetch" to write an error
On 15 February 2017 at 21:21, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:06:46PM +, Fabrizio Cucci wrote:
>> Shouldn't the wrong flag be surrounded by two single quotes instead of
>> a back quote and a single quote?
>
> Some people use the matched backtick/single-quote to emulate the
> non
Jeff King writes:
> I see the patches are marked for 'next' in the latest What's Cooking.
> If it is not too late in today's integration cycle, here is a re-roll of
> patch 3 that squashes in Pranit's suggestion (if it is too late, then
> Pranit, you may want to re-send it as a squash on top).
T
Jeff King writes:
> On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 05:37:30PM +0100, Jáchym Barvínek wrote:
> If FETCH_HEAD failed to write because of a full disk (or any other
> reason), then the right thing is for "git fetch" to write an error to
> stderr, and git-pull should not continue the operation at all.
>
> If
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:29:46PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote:
> > I notice Christian's patch added a few tests. I don't know if we'd want
> > to squash them in (I didn't mean to override his patch at all; I was
> > about to send mine out when I noticed his, and I wondered if we wanted
> > to c
On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 05:37:30PM +0100, Jáchym Barvínek wrote:
> Hello, I would like to report what I consider a bug in git, I hope I'm
> doing it the right way.
> I was trying to run `git pull` in my repository and got the following
> error: "git pull
> Your configuration specifies to merge wi
Jeff King writes:
> So I think what you are seeing is not wrong in the sense of being
> unintended by the author of the message. But I do think that git mostly
> uses matched double or single quotes in its error messages, and the
> non-symmetric quotes are relatively rare. Running:
>
> git grep
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:56:02AM +0300, Serdar Sahin wrote:
> Just to see, if GIT server causes some issues, I’ve pushed to repo to
> github public as a private repo, and can reproduce the issue there as
> well.
FWIW, that server will be running roughly the same version of Git that
is on your G
"Philip Oakley" writes:
> In the next..pu case the abstraction is in the other direction, we
> have potentially multiple points of infection (from feature branches),
> and a broad test (the whole test suite). In this case I believe we
> would like to investigate initially the --first-parent line
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 10:36:32PM +0800, ryenus wrote:
> This can be an optional feature, once enabled, git-add would check the
> hunk(s) to stage for sensitive information, such as passwords, secret
> tokens, then ask the user for confirmation.
>
> The implementation for secret detection could
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:06:46PM +, Fabrizio Cucci wrote:
> it's been a couple of days that I keep noticing something (very minor)
> that my OCD for symmetric things can't really stand.
>
> If you run the following command:
>
> $ git branch --i-dont-exists
>
> you should get:
>
> error:
Hello everyone,
it's been a couple of days that I keep noticing something (very minor)
that my OCD for symmetric things can't really stand.
If you run the following command:
$ git branch --i-dont-exists
you should get:
error: unknown option `i-dont-exists'
Shouldn't the wrong flag be surround
From: "Junio C Hamano"
"Philip Oakley" writes:
There are also a few ideas at the SO answers:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/5652323/717355
I vaguely recall that I saw somebody said the same "mark tips of
topics as good" on the list and answered with why it does not quite
work, though.
I think
Am 15.02.2017 um 13:32 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 14.02.2017 um 15:47 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Johannes Schindelin writes:
What we forgot was to mark stderr as unbuffered again.
I do not see how t
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:38 PM, G. Sylvie Davies
wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:36 PM, G. Sylvie Davies
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have a script that runs the following sequence of commands within a clone:
>>
>> -
>> /usr/bin/git rebase --abort (took 148ms)
>> /usr/bin/git cherry-pick --a
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 12:36 PM, G. Sylvie Davies
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a script that runs the following sequence of commands within a clone:
>
> -
> /usr/bin/git rebase --abort (took 148ms)
> /usr/bin/git cherry-pick --abort (took 103ms)
> /usr/bin/git clean -d -f -x (took 2007ms)
> /usr/b
Hi,
I have a script that runs the following sequence of commands within a clone:
-
/usr/bin/git rebase --abort (took 148ms)
/usr/bin/git cherry-pick --abort (took 103ms)
/usr/bin/git clean -d -f -x (took 2007ms)
/usr/bin/git reflog expire --expire=now --all (took 106ms)
/usr/bin/git reset --h
Lars Schneider writes:
> It looks like as if submodule configs ("submodule.*") for submodules
> with upper case names are ignored.
This observation is surprising, as the second level in three-level
names like ".." is designed to be case
sensitive. A code that uses the config API needs to do ext
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On 02/14, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> diff --git a/t/lib-submodule-update.sh b/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
>> index 61c54f2098..7c8c557572 100755
>> --- a/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
>> +++ b/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>> # - Ne
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On 02/14, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> In later patches we introduce the --recurse-submodule flag for commands
>> that modify the working directory, e.g. git-checkout.
>>
>> It is potentially expensive to check if a submodule needs an update,
>
Lars Schneider writes:
> The test creates a "super" directory that is not removed after the
> test finished. This directory is not used in any subsequent tests and
> should therefore be removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider
> ---
>
> I just noticed that my bug report test does not run prope
Stefan Beller writes:
> Integrate updating the submodules into git checkout, with the same
> safety promises that git-checkout has, i.e. not throw away data unless
> asked to. This is done by first checking if the submodule is at the same
> sha1 as it is recorded in the superproject.
I've so far
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Lars Schneider
wrote:
> @Junio: I think this patch should be applied regardless of the bug.
Sounds good; thanks!
Stefan
Stefan Beller writes:
> Similar to b33a15b08 (push: add recurseSubmodules config option,
> 2015-11-17) and 027771fcb1 (submodule: allow erroneous values for the
> fetchRecurseSubmodules option, 2015-08-17), we add submodule-config code
> that is later used to parse whether we are interested in up
Stefan Beller writes:
> In a later patch we'll use connect_work_tree_and_git_dir when the
> directory for the gitlink file doesn't exist yet. Safely create
> the directory first.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
Among the existing two callers, the "absorb" logic in submodule.c
has safe-create-l
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:17 AM, Lars Schneider
wrote:
> It looks like as if submodule configs ("submodule.*") for submodules
> with upper case names are ignored. The test cases shows that skipping
> a submodule during a recursive clone seems not to work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider
> ---
>
Stefan Beller writes:
> We need the gentle version in a later patch. As we have just one caller,
> migrate the caller.
Ordinarily, we keep the original helper implemented as a thin
wrapper that passes NULL as retun_error_code, which causes it to
die() on error for existing callers. But because
On 02/14, Stefan Beller wrote:
> In later patches we introduce the --recurse-submodule flag for commands
> that modify the working directory, e.g. git-checkout.
>
> It is potentially expensive to check if a submodule needs an update,
> because a common theme to interact with submodules is to spawn
On 02/14, Stefan Beller wrote:
> diff --git a/t/lib-submodule-update.sh b/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
> index 61c54f2098..7c8c557572 100755
> --- a/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
> +++ b/t/lib-submodule-update.sh
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> # - New submodule (no_submodule => add_sub1)
> # - Removed submodule (a
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 09:27:53AM -0500, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
> I have some informal numbers in a spreadsheet. I was seeing
> a 8-9% speed up on a status on my gigantic repo.
>
> I'll try to put together a before/after perf-test to better
> demonstrate this.
Thanks. What I'm mostly curious ab
Am 14.02.2017 um 23:59 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
* rs/ls-files-partial-optim (2017-02-13) 2 commits
- ls-files: move only kept cache entries in prune_cache()
- ls-files: pass prefix length explicitly to prune_cache()
"ls-files" run with pathspec has been micro-optimized to avoid one
extra call
This can be an optional feature, once enabled, git-add would check the
hunk(s) to stage for sensitive information, such as passwords, secret
tokens, then ask the user for confirmation.
The implementation for secret detection could be regexp pattern(s),
and/or (trusted?) commands
Alternative solut
On 2/14/2017 5:03 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:31:46PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
On Windows, calls to memihash() and maintaining the istate.name_hash and
istate.dir_hash HashMaps take significant time on very large
repositories. This series of changes reduces the ov
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:24 PM, wrote:
> + *)
> + __git_complete_tree_file "$ref" "$cur"
> + ;;
There is one more caveat here.
Both our __git_complete_index_file() and Bash's builtin filename
completion lists matching paths like this:
Hi Philip,
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Philip Oakley wrote:
> From: "Christian Couder"
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Junio C Hamano
> > wrote:
> > > Johannes Schindelin writes:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Johannes Schindelin writes:
> > > > >
>
Hi Christian,
On Wed, 15 Feb 2017, Christian Couder wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Junio C Hamano
> wrote:
>
> > Probably a less resource intensive approach is to find the tips of the
> > topics not in 'next' but in 'pu' and test them. That would give you
> > which topic(s) are pro
> On 14 Feb 2017, at 19:16, Martin-Louis Bright wrote:
[CC'ing Luke and George]
> hi!
>
> I am using git-p4.py to migrate a lot of medium and large Perforce
> depots into git. I almost exclusively go one way: from Perforce to
> git. I also frequently re-clone/re-migrate as the Perforce migra
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 3:41 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> SZEDER Gábor writes:
>
>>> If you feel uncomfortable and want these to cook longer, please tell
>>> me so.
>>
>> Well, it was mainly my surprise that a 20+ patch series arriving so
>> late that it gets queued on top of -rc0 would still make
Hi Junio,
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> >> OK. Should this go directly to 'master', as the isatty thing is
> >> already in?
> >
> > From my point of view, it is not crucial. The next Git for Windows
> > version will have it, of course, and Hannes
Hi Hannes,
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 14.02.2017 um 15:47 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
> > On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > > Johannes Schindelin writes:
> > > > When removing the hack for isatty(), we actually removed more than
> > > > just an isatty() hack: we
Hi Junio,
On Fri, 10 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > Technically, it is not a write-up, and I never meant it to be that. I
> > intended this document to help me remember what had been discussed,
> > and I doubt it is useful at all to anybody who has not been
On Tue, Feb 14, Olaf Hering wrote:
> How would I debug it?
One line is supposed to be longer than 998 chars, but something along
the way truncated it and corrupted the patch. No idea why the error
today is different from the error yesterday.
'git pull' has to be used in this case.
Olaf
signatu
The test creates a "super" directory that is not removed after the
test finished. This directory is not used in any subsequent tests and
should therefore be removed.
Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider
---
I just noticed that my bug report test does not run properly without this
patch:
http://public-
It looks like as if submodule configs ("submodule.*") for submodules
with upper case names are ignored. The test cases shows that skipping
a submodule during a recursive clone seems not to work.
Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider
---
I observed the bug on Windows, macOS, and Linux and at least on
v2.
Although I'm not convinced that completion of modified files is unnecessary,
I'm at least persuaded that not all users would welcome such a change. Given
the hint from Gabor that Alt-/ forces filesystem completion, there is even no
big win in stopping to offer further refnames after one has alre
93 matches
Mail list logo
