Eric Wong wrote:
> Craig McQueen wrote:
> > When doing "git svn dcommit", the SVN revision just has the date/time
> stamp of the time of the dcommit.
>
> Yeah, that's sometimes annoying to me, too.
>
> > Apparently SVN revisions can have an "svn:original-date" property, which
> would be good to
Craig McQueen wrote:
> Is it possible to set multi-line SVN properties somehow? Or
> could this be a future enhancement?
I'm not sure. I don't use this feature, but it seems tied
to gitattributes(5), and I'm not sure if gitattributes supports
multi-line values, either...
Craig McQueen wrote:
> When doing "git svn dcommit", the SVN revision just has the date/time stamp
> of the time of the dcommit.
Yeah, that's sometimes annoying to me, too.
> Apparently SVN revisions can have an "svn:original-date" property, which
> would be good to set on dcommit, to preserve
We found a few run-away here documents that are started with an
end-of-here-doc marker that is incorrectly spelled, e.g.
git some command >actual &&
cat
Stefan Beller wrote:
> Documentation/git-status.txt | 9 +
> t/t3600-rm.sh| 18 +-
> t/t7506-status-submodule.sh | 24
> wt-status.c | 13 +++--
> 4 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Very ni
Stefan Beller wrote:
> By having a stricter check in the superproject we catch errors earlier,
> instead of spawning a child process to tell us.
Plus the error message is clearer.
> ---
> submodule.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder
Stefan Beller wrote:
> Migrate 'is_submodule_modified' to the new porcelain format of
> git-status.
>
> As the old porcelain only reported ' M' for submodules, no
> matter what happened inside the submodule (untracked files,
> changes to tracked files or move of HEAD), the new API
> properly repor
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> Junio would you be fine with just this on top:
>
> diff --git a/t/README b/t/README
> index 4982d1c521..9e079a360a 100644
> --- a/t/README
> +++ b/t/README
> @@ -379,2 +379,5 @@ Do:
>
> + - Include tests which assert that the desired & recommended behavior
> +
If I add an untracked file to a submodule or modify a tracked file,
currently "git status --short" treats the change in the same way as
changes to the current HEAD of the submodule:
$ git clone --quiet --recurse-submodules
https://gerrit.googlesource.com/gerrit
$ echo hello >gerri
By having a stricter check in the superproject we catch errors earlier,
instead of spawning a child process to tell us.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
submodule.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index d355ddb46b..66335159ae 100
Migrate 'is_submodule_modified' to the new porcelain format of
git-status.
As the old porcelain only reported ' M' for submodules, no
matter what happened inside the submodule (untracked files,
changes to tracked files or move of HEAD), the new API
properly reports the different scenarios.
In a f
This comes as a series; first I'd like to refactor is_submodule_modified
to take advantage of the new porcelain=2 plumbing switch to check for changes
in the submodule.
On top of the refactoring comes the actual change, which moved the
rewriting of the submodule change indicator letter to the coll
Hi, everybody!
As part of my improvements to difflame I want to use revision
information as provided by blame --line-porcelain so that I can avoid
some git calls to cat-file -p to get revision information hoping that
information would be a match. However I'm not finding that to be the
case.
$ git
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:54:48AM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:46:14PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >
> >> But both of these are really just a limited special case for what I'd
> >> really lik
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:46:14PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> But both of these are really just a limited special case for what I'd
>> really like, which is given branch "foo", copy it and all its
>> configuration to a new name "
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:26:21PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>>
>> > of things you think we should be putting in the test suite. I.e.
>> > should the tests be:
>> >
>> > a) Only be a collection of invocat
I'd like to be able to set the svn:externals property using "git svn propset".
However, that property can be multi-line. I've not had any success in setting
this property because git svn doesn't seem to handle the newlines.
Is it possible to set multi-line SVN properties somehow? Or could this b
When doing "git svn dcommit", the SVN revision just has the date/time stamp of
the time of the dcommit.
Apparently SVN revisions can have an "svn:original-date" property, which would
be good to set on dcommit, to preserve the timestamp from the git repository.
https://subversion.apache.org/docs
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:46:14PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> But both of these are really just a limited special case for what I'd
> really like, which is given branch "foo", copy it and all its
> configuration to a new name "bar". I.e. both of the hacks above only
> set up the corre
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:41:24PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> > In that case, something like this would be closer to the desired
> > behavior?
>
> Yes, though you can spell:
>
> cat >expect <<-\EOF
> EOF
>
> as just:
>
> >expect
Ah, that sounds like a better way to fix this with a smaller
Jeff King writes:
> OTOH, we could perhaps make the rule "ignored unless %(gpg) formatters
> are used". Which would be backwards-compatible and safe for old formats,
> and work correctly for new ones.
Yup, that is a very sensible escape hatch that we can use later.
Thanks.
When I start work on a new series I have e.g. avar/various-tag-2 with
its upstream info set to origin/master.
When I start avar/various-tag-3 just:
git checkcout -b avar/various-tag-3 avar/various-tag-2
I don't get the correct tracking info. As far as I can tell there's no
way to do this in
On 22.03.2017 13:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Please respond to the list, saying it is OK to add your "sign-off"
> (see Documentation/SubmittingPatches) to these patches.
Please feel free to do so and thanks for handling the issue.
Regards
Jan
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:34:43PM -0400, Santiago Torres wrote:
> > I worked up the patch to do that (see below), but I got stumped trying
> > to write the commit message. Perhaps that is what the test intended, but
> > I don't think tag's --format understands "%G" codes at all. So you
> > cannot
Jeff King writes:
> I worked up the patch to do that (see below), but I got stumped trying
> to write the commit message. Perhaps that is what the test intended, but
> I don't think tag's --format understands "%G" codes at all.
> So you cannot tell from the output if a tag was valid or not; you h
Lars Schneider wrote:
> we rebased a branch using "--preserve-merges --interactive" and were
> surprised that the operation reported success although it silently
> omitted commits (Git 2.12 on Windows). A little search revealed that
> these are likely known bugs [1]. Would it make sense to prin
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:26:21PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
> > of things you think we should be putting in the test suite. I.e.
> > should the tests be:
> >
> > a) Only be a collection of invocations of git we'd be comfortable
> > showing to someone as "t
Thanks.
> I worked up the patch to do that (see below), but I got stumped trying
> to write the commit message. Perhaps that is what the test intended, but
> I don't think tag's --format understands "%G" codes at all. So you
> cannot tell from the output if a tag was valid or not; you have to check
> the e
Brandon Williams wrote:
> v2 addresses Jonathan's comments from v1.
> * Fix a test
> * Add some documentation
> * remove short option from --push-option in git send-pack
>
> Brandon Williams (2):
> send-pack: send push options correctly in stateless-rpc case
> remote-curl: allow push op
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:12:07PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > sq=\'
>> > test_expect_success '...' '
>> > cat >expect <<-EOF
>> > Execution of ${sq}false $submodulesha1${sq} ...
>> > '
>> >
>> > but I'm not sure if that is
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> of things you think we should be putting in the test suite. I.e.
> should the tests be:
>
> a) Only be a collection of invocations of git we'd be comfortable
> showing to someone as "this works, and this is how you should do it",
> or things that explicitly fail
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:12:07PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > sq=\'
> > test_expect_success '...' '
> > cat >expect <<-EOF
> > Execution of ${sq}false $submodulesha1${sq} ...
> > '
> >
> > but I'm not sure if that is any more readable.
>
> Yup, my eyes have long learned to coa
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:15:57PM -0400, Santiago Torres wrote:
> > > Like 2/3, this one also produces test failures for me. It looks like
> > > "verify-tag" does not show a tag which has been forged. I'm not sure if
> > > that's intentional (and the test is wrong) or a bug. +cc Santiago
> >
>
Teach remote-curl to understand push options and to be able to convey
them across HTTP.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams
---
Documentation/git-send-pack.txt | 6 ++
builtin/send-pack.c | 5 +
remote-curl.c | 8
t/t5545-push-options.sh | 33
"git send-pack --stateless-rpc" puts each request in a sequence of pkt-lines
followed by a flush-pkt. The push option code forgot about this and sends push
options and their terminating delimiter as ordinary pkt-lines that get their
length header stripped off by remote-curl before being sent to the
v2 addresses Jonathan's comments from v1.
* Fix a test
* Add some documentation
* remove short option from --push-option in git send-pack
Brandon Williams (2):
send-pack: send push options correctly in stateless-rpc case
remote-curl: allow push options
Documentation/git-send-pack.txt |
On 03/22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> > "git send-pack --stateless-rpc" puts each request in a sequence of pkt-lines
> > followed by a flush-pkt. The push option code forgot about this and sends
> > push
> > options and their terminating delimiter as ordinary pkt-lines th
Change the mention of "Inside the
Clarify the test_have_prereq documentation so that it's clear in the
reader's mind when the text says "most common use of this directly"
what the answer to "as opposed to what?" is.
Usually this function isn't used in lieu of using the prerequisite
support built into test_expect_*, mention that ex
Change a link to the web version of the TAP::Parser::Grammar
documentation to link to metacpan.org instead of search.cpan.org.
This is something I added back in commit 20873f45e7 ("t/README:
Document the do's and don'ts of tests", 2010-07-02), at the time
search.cpan.org was the more actively main
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:04:32PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> From: Jan Palus
> >>
> >> These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was
> >> merged to 2.12.
> >>
> >> Signed-o
Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>> sq=\'
>> test_expect_success '...' '
>> cat >expect <<-EOF
>> Execution of ${sq}false $submodulesha1${sq} ...
>> '
>>
>> but I'm not sure if that is any more readable.
>
> If I recall correctly, I ma
On 03/22, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
I agree with most of these changes, I'll make them locally and send out
a reroll.
> Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> > --- a/builtin/send-pack.c
> > +++ b/builtin/send-pack.c
> > @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc, const char **argv, const
> > char *pref
Jeff King writes:
> Neither of those is true, but I think:
>
> cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> Execution of '\''false $submodulesha1'\'' failed in ...
> EOF
>
> is safer and less surprising. The single-quote handling is unfortunate and
> ugly, but necessary to get them into the shell snippet in the
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 03:07:45PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > Neither of those is true, but I think:
> >
> > cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> > Execution of '\''false $submodulesha1'\'' failed in ...
> > EOF
> >
> > is safer and less surprising. The single-quote handling is unfortunate and
> > u
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
>>> Please drop "interleaved", as we are not encouraging GNUism. We
>>> just tolerate it but do not guarantee to keep them working.
>>
>> This brings up the same point you made in
>> , I replied to in
>>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:49:48PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>
>> * The syntax of the here-doc was wrong, such that the entire test was
>> sucked into the here-doc, which is why the test succeeded successfully.
>
> As opposed to succeeding un
Jeff King writes:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> From: Jan Palus
>>
>> These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was
>> merged to 2.12.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
>> ---
>>
>> * This should be applied on top of 4fea72f4 ("
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 05:43:57PM -0400, Santiago Torres wrote:
> > Like 2/3, this one also produces test failures for me. It looks like
> > "verify-tag" does not show a tag which has been forged. I'm not sure if
> > that's intentional (and the test is wrong) or a bug.
>
> I see that offending
Hi,
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> As to the default of seriously slowing down all SHA-1 computations: since
> you made that the default, at compile time, with no way to turn on the
> faster computation, this will have a major, negative impact. Are you
> really, really sure you want to do that?
>
>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:49:48PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> * The syntax of the here-doc was wrong, such that the entire test was
> sucked into the here-doc, which is why the test succeeded successfully.
As opposed to succeeding unsuccessfully? :)
> * The variable $submodulesha1 was not e
W dniu 21.03.2017 o 23:57, Stefan Beller pisze:
> --- a/Documentation/git-describe.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-describe.txt
> @@ -30,9 +30,14 @@ OPTIONS
> Commit-ish object names to describe. Defaults to HEAD if omitted.
>
> --dirty[=]::
> - Describe the working tree.
> - It me
There are three issues with the test:
* The syntax of the here-doc was wrong, such that the entire test was
sucked into the here-doc, which is why the test succeeded successfully.
* The variable $submodulesha1 was not expanded as it was inside a single
quoted string. Use double quote to expan
On 03/21, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 12:22 AM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> > With these two pieces of information a child process can correctly
> > interpret the pathspecs provided by the user as well as being able to
> > properly format its output relative to the directory the user
Brandon Williams wrote:
> --- a/builtin/send-pack.c
> +++ b/builtin/send-pack.c
> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc, const char **argv, const char
> *prefix)
> int progress = -1;
> int from_stdin = 0;
> struct push_cas_option cas = {0};
> + struct string_list pu
On 03/21, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:12:19PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > Currently when there are untracked changes in a file "one" and in a file
> > "two" in the repository and the user uses:
> >
> > git stash push -k one
> >
> > all changes in "two" are wiped out
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 05:10:03PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > From: Jan Palus
> >
> > These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was
> > merged to 2.12.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
> > ---
> >
>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 09:33:47PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
> > > - sed -e 1,2d >actual && # drop "Saved..." and "HEAD is now..."
> > > + sed -e 1,1d >actual && # drop "Saved..."
> > > test_i18ncmp expect actual
> > > '
> >
> > This too, though I think "1d" would be the more usual way to
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:32:22PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > But the submodule path seems wrong, too. I'm not sure if
> > the expectation is wrong, or if there's a bug. +cc Stefan
>
> Yes the actual output is wrong, too.
> But that is not because Git is wrong, but the test suite is.
>
>
On 03/22, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams writes:
>
> > Teach remote-curl to understand push options and to be able to convey
> > them across HTTP.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams
> > ---
>
> An earlier 438fc684 ("push options: pass push options to the
> transport helper", 2017
Jeff King writes:
> After applying this, I get a failure:
>
> --- expect 2017-03-22 21:01:53.350721155 +
> +++ actual 2017-03-22 21:01:53.346721155 +
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -Execution of 'false $submodulesha1' failed in submodule path 'submodule'
> +Execution of 'false 4301fd3e4110d3
On 03/21, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:12:17PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
>
> > git stash push uses other git commands internally. Currently it only
> > passes the -q flag to those if the -q flag is passed to git stash. when
> > using 'git stash push -p -q --no-keep-index', i
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
>> index 347857fa7c..a20df9420a 100755
>> --- a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7406-submodule-upd
Jeff Hostetler writes:
> On 3/22/2017 4:54 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for an update.
>>
>> One notable difference I noticed since the previous round is that
>> this no longer adds precomputed hash to "struct cache_entry". As
>> you are aiming to manage an index with a large numb
Brandon Williams writes:
> Teach remote-curl to understand push options and to be able to convey
> them across HTTP.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams
> ---
An earlier 438fc684 ("push options: pass push options to the
transport helper", 2017-02-08) said:
...
Fix this by propagating t
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thanks. Why does the topic name sound familiar to me? Did we have
> a recent attempt to do the same that didn't work well or something?
'sb/push-options-via-transport' sounds similar. Before that we silently
ignored push options in http,
Brandon Williams writes:
> This series enables push options to be sent across http using remote-curl
>
> Thanks to Jonathan Nieder for helping troubleshoot.
>
> Brandon Williams (2):
> send-pack: send push options correctly in stateless-rpc case
> remote-curl: allow push options
Thanks. Why
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> Yes, all of this is correct, but not relevant to what I'm describing
> in the commit message, because I'm making a documentation change and
> describing how you *would* expect git to work if you read the
> *documentation*, not if you read the code.
OK.
>>> +-l:
Brandon Williams wrote:
> "git send-pack --stateless-rpc" puts each request in a sequence of pkt-lines
> followed by a flush-pkt. The push option code forgot about this and sends push
> options and their terminating delimiter as ordinary pkt-lines that get their
> length header stripped off by rem
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> From: Jan Palus
>
> These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was
> merged to 2.12.
>
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
> ---
>
> * This should be applied on top of 4fea72f4 ("t/t7004-tag: Add
>--format s
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>> Please drop "interleaved", as we are not encouraging GNUism. We
>> just tolerate it but do not guarantee to keep them working.
>
> This brings up the same point you made in
> , I replied to in
> ,
> and that you didn't get back to me about.
>
> Rather than spli
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> diff --git a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> index 347857fa7c..a20df9420a 100755
> --- a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> +++ b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> @@ -442,9 +442,9 @@ test_expect_success 'submodul
On 3/22/2017 4:54 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Junio C Hamano writes:
This patch series replaces my earlier
* jh/memihash-opt (2017-02-17) 5 commits
patch series.
Ahh. I was scratching my head trying to remember why some of these
look so familiar. [PATCH v2 ...] would have helped.
Tha
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:08:03PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> From: Jan Palus
>
> This came as part of jk/quote-env-path-list-component and was merged
> to 2.11.1 and later.
>
> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
> ---
>
> * This should be applied on top of 5e74824f ("t5615-alternate-env:
>
Junio C Hamano writes:
>> This patch series replaces my earlier
>> * jh/memihash-opt (2017-02-17) 5 commits
>> patch series.
>
> Ahh. I was scratching my head trying to remember why some of these
> look so familiar. [PATCH v2 ...] would have helped.
>
> Thank you for an update.
One notabl
Just FYI before I start reading each patch carefully...
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] hashmap: allow memihash computation to be continued
ERROR: trailing whitespace
#28: FILE: hashmap.c:56:
+ */ $
total: 1 errors, 0 warnings, 30 lines checked
Subject: [PATC
Ben Peart writes:
> Add packet_write_list_gently() which writes multiple lines in a single
> call and then calls packet_flush_gently(). This is used later in this
> patch series.
I can see how it would be convenient to have a function like this.
I'd name it without _gently(), though. We call so
From: Jan Palus
These all came as part of an earlier st/verify-tag topic that was
merged to 2.12.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
---
* This should be applied on top of 4fea72f4 ("t/t7004-tag: Add
--format specifier tests", 2017-01-17)
t/t7004-tag.sh| 8
t/t7030-verify-tag
From: Jan Palus
This came as part of jk/quote-env-path-list-component and was merged
to 2.11.1 and later.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
---
* This should be applied on top of 5e74824f ("t5615-alternate-env:
double-quotes in file names do not work on Windows", 2016-12-21)
t/t5615-alternate-
Because I'd prefer to be able to queue fixes on individual topics
that introduced the breakages, I splitted the fixes in your two
messages into three patches.
Please respond to the list, saying it is OK to add your "sign-off"
(see Documentation/SubmittingPatches) to these patches.
Thanks.
Jan Pa
From: Jan Palus
The came in an earlier sb/submodule-update-initial-runs-custom-script
topic that was merged to 2.12.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
---
* This should be applied on top of e7b37caf ("submodule update: run
custom update script for initial populating as well", 2017-01-25)
t/t
This series enables push options to be sent across http using remote-curl
Thanks to Jonathan Nieder for helping troubleshoot.
Brandon Williams (2):
send-pack: send push options correctly in stateless-rpc case
remote-curl: allow push options
builtin/send-pack.c | 5 +
remote-curl.c
"git send-pack --stateless-rpc" puts each request in a sequence of pkt-lines
followed by a flush-pkt. The push option code forgot about this and sends push
options and their terminating delimiter as ordinary pkt-lines that get their
length header stripped off by remote-curl before being sent to the
Teach remote-curl to understand push options and to be able to convey
them across HTTP.
Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams
---
builtin/send-pack.c | 5 +
remote-curl.c | 8
t/t5545-push-options.sh | 30 +-
3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 1
* Stefan Beller [2017-03-22 12:43:41 -0700]:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:23 PM, wrote:
Good day,
I have a question with respect to how git generates "pretty" (ie: human
readable) unified diffs. It's to my understanding that git uses its own
(simplified/minimized) fork of libxdiff, simply ref
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:23 PM, wrote:
> Good day,
>
> I have a question with respect to how git generates "pretty" (ie: human
> readable) unified diffs. It's to my understanding that git uses its own
> (simplified/minimized) fork of libxdiff, simply referred to as "xdiff"
> [1].
correct.
> W
Jan Palus writes:
> diff -ur git-2.12.0.orig/t/t7004-tag.sh git-2.12.0/t/t7004-tag.sh
> --- git-2.12.0.orig/t/t7004-tag.sh2017-02-25 14:10:53.059367179 +0100
> +++ git-2.12.0/t/t7004-tag.sh 2017-02-25 14:11:45.105827700 +0100
> @@ -880,17 +880,17 @@
> '
>
> test_expect_success 'verifying
g...@jeffhostetler.com writes:
> From: Jeff Hostetler
>
> This patch series is a performance optimization for
> lazy_init_name_hash() in name-hash.c on very large
> repositories.
>
> This change allows lazy_init_name_hash() to optionally
> use multiple threads when building the the_index.dir_hash
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
>> And after Jeff's change, one that took multiple patterns:
>>
>> git tag --list 'v*rc*' --list '*2.8*'
>
> I do not think this is a correct depiction of the evolution, and is
> a confusing descriptio
Good day,
I have a question with respect to how git generates "pretty" (ie: human
readable) unified diffs. It's to my understanding that git uses its own
(simplified/minimized) fork of libxdiff, simply referred to as "xdiff"
[1]. Which tool/library is used to take the xdiff output and generate
th
Lars Schneider writes:
> Therefore, we did the following:
> * Johannes Schindelin set up a Visual Studio Team Services build
> sponsored by Microsoft and made it accessible via an Azure Function
> that speaks a super-simple API. We made TravisCI use this API to
> trigger a build, wait until
On 3/22/2017 2:02 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:14 AM, wrote:
During our testing on the Windows source tree (3.1M
files, 500K folders, 450MB index), this change reduced
the runtime of lazy_init_name_hash() from 1.4 to 0.27
seconds.
This sounds promising. :)
A fast sk
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> So we'd want to be able to say:
>> "get a tarball including all submodules except the superproject"
>> (This would produce the "optional language pack tarball")
>
> You do not need that. Just go to the gitman-l10n project and grab a
>
Stefan Beller writes:
> I wonder if we could have partial functionality for these "clone and checkout"
> fake submodules, by having e.g. the .gitmodules file telling you the URL
> and path, but no recorded gitlink in the tree.
You can have such a comment in any file including .gitmodules but
wou
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Jan Palus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> attached patch fixes 2 out of 3 tests failing in my env -- missing EOF,
> incorrectly placed "&&" after EOF. One test seems to be incorrect as it
> fails even after fixing. I suspect the main difference between my env and
> others is in
On 22/03/17 18:15, Werner Koch wrote:
> It actually does. For the tasks git uses gpg you should not notice a
> difference in gpgme between any of these versions.
Bernhard wrote "interoperability problems between [...] key stores". I'm
under the impression you are actually answering the question "
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> The `reword` command used to call `git commit` in a manner that asks for
> the prepare-commit-msg and commit-msg hooks to do their thing.
>
> Converting that part of the interactive rebase to C code introduced the
> regression where those hooks were no longer run.
>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jean-Noël Avila writes:
>
>>> I am wondering if Documentation/po part should be a separate
>>> repository, with a dedicated i18n/l10n coordinator. Would it make
>>> it easier for (1) those who write code and doc without knowing other
>>>
It appears more tests are affected:
$ grep -r '^[[:space:]]*EOF &&' .
./t7406-submodule-update.sh:EOF &&
./t7030-verify-tag.sh: EOF &&
./t7030-verify-tag.sh: EOF &&
./t7004-tag.sh: EOF &&
./t7004-tag.sh: EOF &&
attaching patch for t7406 and t7030 which both fail even after fix is
applied
1 - 100 of 147 matches
Mail list logo
