UNSECURED BUSINESS/PERSONAL LOAN BY LOAN CAPITAL FINANCE
- NO COLLATERAL
- MINIMUM DOCUMENTATION
- BUSINESS LOAN UP TO FIVE(5) MILLION US DOLLARS
CONTACT US TODAY VIA EMAIL: finance.incapi...@hotmail.com
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> I think respecting gpg.program would be nicer. Is there a reason not
> to do that?
>
> I suspect receive-pack just forgot to call git_gpg_config.
That would be a good change.
> How is the keyring configured for other commands that use GPG, like
> "git tag -v"? (Forgi
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> +Dave Borowitz, who implemented push cert handling in JGit and Gerrit
> Hi Ian,
>
> Ian Jackson wrote[1]:
>
>> I have been investigating git signed pushes. I found a number of
>> infelicities in the server side implementation which make using this
>> in practice rather
On 25/08/17 16:08, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:25:29PM +0100, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
>
>> As of v2.10.0-rc1-4-g321459439 ("cat-file: support --textconv/--filters
>> in batch mode"), t8010-cat-file-filters.sh has been failing on Cygwin.
>> Digging into this, the test looks to exp
+Dave Borowitz, who implemented push cert handling in JGit and Gerrit
Hi Ian,
Ian Jackson wrote[1]:
> I have been investigating git signed pushes. I found a number of
> infelicities in the server side implementation which make using this
> in practice rather difficult. I'm emailing here (before
Ian Jackson writes:
> I have been investigating git signed pushes. I found a number of
> infelicities in the server side implementation which make using this
> in practice rather difficult. I'm emailing here (before writing
> patches) to see what people think of my proposed changes.
> ...
> If
I have been investigating git signed pushes. I found a number of
infelicities in the server side implementation which make using this
in practice rather difficult. I'm emailing here (before writing
patches) to see what people think of my proposed changes.
1. PUSH_CERT_KEY has truncated keyid (D
On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 08:14:08 +0200
Christian Couder wrote:
> As Git is used by more and more by people having different needs, I
> think it is not realistic to expect that we can optimize its object
> storage for all these different needs. So a better strategy is to just
> let them store objects
UNSECURED BUSINESS/PERSONAL LOAN BY LOAN CAPITAL FINANCE
- NO COLLATERAL
- MINIMUM DOCUMENTATION
- BUSINESS LOAN UP TO FIVE(5) MILLION US DOLLARS
CONTACT US TODAY VIA EMAIL: finance.incapi...@hotmail.com
Stefan Beller writes:
> Upon closer inspection, I have the impression that f389c808b6
> (Rework make_usage to print the usage message immediately,
> 2007-10-14) introduced the extra new line without giving a rationale.
I do not think that is the case. The code before that patch
collected all th
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
>> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
>> the subcommands itself, such that:
>>
>> #$ git worktree
>>
Martin Ågren writes:
> files_transaction_prepare() and the functions it calls add strings to a
> string list without duplicating them, i.e., we keep the original raw
> pointers we were given. That is "ok", since we keep them only for a
> short-enough time, but we end up leaking some of them.
Sor
Stefan Beller writes:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Thanks. I'll try to queue these before I'll go offline.
>>
>> Mentors may want to help the student further in adjusting the patch
>> series to the more recent codebase; unfortunately the area the GSoC
>> project
Stefan Beller writes:
> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
> the subcommands itself, such that:
>
> #$ git worktree
> #usage: git worktree add [] []
> # or: git worktree
On 08/24, Ivan Vyshnevskyi wrote:
> On 23/08/17 18:58, Jeff King wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 12:49:29PM +0300, Ivan Vyshnevskyi wrote:
> >
> >> Commits 47abd85 (fetch: Strip usernames from url's before storing them,
> >> 2009-04-17) and later 882d49c (push: anonymize URL in status output,
>
Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
the subcommands itself, such that:
#$ git worktree
#usage: git worktree add [] []
# or: git worktree list []
# or: git worktree loc
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thanks. I'll try to queue these before I'll go offline.
>
> Mentors may want to help the student further in adjusting the patch
> series to the more recent codebase; unfortunately the area the GSoC
> project touches is a bit fluid these da
We check the date of epoch timestamp candidates already with
starts_with(). Move beyond that part using skip_prefix() instead of
checking it again using a regular expression. Also group the minutes
part, so that we can access them using a substring match instead of
using a magic number.
Signed-o
has_epoch_timestamp() looks for time stamps that amount to either
1969-12-31 24:00 or 1970-01-01 00:00 after applying the time zone
offset. Move the check for these two dates up, set the expected hour
based on which one is found, or exit early if none of them are present,
thus avoiding to engage t
On 08/25, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On 08/25, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Brandon Williams writes:
> >
> > > + /* If using a new version put that stuff here after a second
> > > null byte */
> > > + strbuf_addch(&request, '\0');
> > > + strbuf_addf(&request, "version=%d%c",
On 08/25, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams writes:
>
> > + /* If using a new version put that stuff here after a second
> > null byte */
> > + strbuf_addch(&request, '\0');
> > + strbuf_addf(&request, "version=%d%c", 2, '\0');
> > + /* subsequent s
Thanks. I'll try to queue these before I'll go offline.
Mentors may want to help the student further in adjusting the patch
series to the more recent codebase; unfortunately the area the GSoC
project touches is a bit fluid these days. I resolved the conflicts
with nd/pune-in-worktree and bw/subm
On 08/25, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:35:50AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> > > Sadly, while splitting these things apart makes the protocol
> > > conceptually cleaner, I'm not sure if we can consider them separately
> > > and avoid adding an extra round-trip to the protocol.
We hand over the "referent" string (buffer) to several different
functions, one of which would sometimes keep the raw pointer,
referent.buf. (When split_symref_update calls string_list_insert.) The
previous patch removed that behavior, so we can now safely release the
string buffer before returning
files_transaction_prepare() and the functions it calls add strings to a
string list without duplicating them, i.e., we keep the original raw
pointers we were given. That is "ok", since we keep them only for a
short-enough time, but we end up leaking some of them.
Switch to duplicating the strings,
Jeff King writes:
> But what if we instead think of it not as "protocol v2" but as "can I
> give the server some hints that it may end up ignoring", then we end up
> with something more like:
>
> C: please run upload-pack (btw, I'm only interested in refs/heads/foo)
> S: advertisement + caps
Brandon Williams writes:
> + /* If using a new version put that stuff here after a second
> null byte */
> + strbuf_addch(&request, '\0');
> + strbuf_addf(&request, "version=%d%c", 2, '\0');
> + /* subsequent supported versions can also be added */
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:35:50AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Sadly, while splitting these things apart makes the protocol
> > conceptually cleaner, I'm not sure if we can consider them separately
> > and avoid adding an extra round-trip to the protocol.
>
> How about the idea of using thi
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:14:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
> > For now I would suggest we put a protocol v2 in place that is
> > the current protocol + a version number coming through the
> > poked hole at the beginning; the goal and review of this series
> > ought
Hi,
Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:53:21PM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote:
>> Another version of Git's wire protocol is a topic that has been discussed and
>> attempted by many in the community over the years. The biggest challenge, as
>> far as I understand, has been coming up wit
Stefan Beller writes:
> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
> the subcommands itself, such that:
>
> $ git worktree
> usage: git worktree add [] []
>or: git worktree list [
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:53:21PM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote:
> Another version of Git's wire protocol is a topic that has been discussed and
> attempted by many in the community over the years. The biggest challenge, as
> far as I understand, has been coming up with a transition plan to usin
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
>> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
>> the subcommands itself, such that:
>>
>> $ git worktree
>> usage: git worktree add [] [
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
>> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
>> the subcommands itself, such that:
>>
>> $ git worktree
>>
Stefan Beller writes:
> Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
> given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
> the subcommands itself, such that:
>
> $ git worktree
> usage: git worktree add [] []
>or: git worktree list [
Stefan Beller writes:
> For now I would suggest we put a protocol v2 in place that is
> the current protocol + a version number coming through the
> poked hole at the beginning; the goal and review of this series
> ought to focus on getting the version handshake right...
Oh, we are in absolute a
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
>> Martin Langhoff writes:
>>
>>> - when I tell it to forget, won't it forget the pre-resolution state?
>>
>> I do not recall the details of what I did ;-) so I played around a
>> bit. Here is what I did:
>> ...
>> After git rerere forget, I o
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams writes:
>
>> The best way to preserve functionality with old servers and clients would be
>> to
>> communicate using the same end point but have the client send a bit of extra
>> information with its initial request. This
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 07:43:48PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote:
> Add a file .tsan-suppressions and list two functions in it: want_color()
> and transfer_debug(). Both of these use the pattern
>
> static int foo = -1;
> if (foo < 0)
> foo = bar();
>
> where bar always ret
Heiko Voigt writes:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:10:52AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:42:54AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017
Currently the worktree command gives its usage, when no subcommand is
given. However there are no general options, all options are related to
the subcommands itself, such that:
$ git worktree
usage: git worktree add [] []
or: git worktree list []
or: git worktree lock []
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:10:52AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:42:54AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> In my hands, I need to tell rerere to forget, *and then recreate the merge
> conflict* before I can resolve it again and let rerere learn the new
> resolution.
I can believe that---that is how I originally desiged "forget" to
behave.
Even though My quick tests to p
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Martin Langhoff writes:
>
>> - when I tell it to forget, won't it forget the pre-resolution state?
>
> I do not recall the details of what I did ;-) so I played around a
> bit. Here is what I did:
> ...
> After git rerere forget, I observe (check subdirectories in
> .g
Martin Langhoff writes:
> - when I tell it to forget, won't it forget the pre-resolution state?
I do not recall the details of what I did ;-) so I played around a
bit. Here is what I did:
git checkout master^0
git merge --no-ff --no-edit pb/trailers-from-command-line
g
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:25:29PM +0100, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> As of v2.10.0-rc1-4-g321459439 ("cat-file: support --textconv/--filters
> in batch mode"), t8010-cat-file-filters.sh has been failing on Cygwin.
> Digging into this, the test looks to expose a timing window: it appears
> that if `gi
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 09:36:13AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> Since f1068efefe (sha1_file: drop experimental GIT_USE_LOOKUP search,
> 2017-08-09)
> the definition of sha1_entry_pos() has been removed from "sha1-lookup.c", so
> there is no need anymore for its declaration in "sha1-lookup.h".
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:58:52PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, Mike Hommey wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:15:20PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 18 Aug 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > >
> > > > Mike Hommey wrote[1]:
> >
On 24/08/17 17:46, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Phillip Wood writes:
>
>> It could be expensive to check that the local modifications will not
>> interfere with the rebase - wouldn't it have to look at all the files
>> touched by each commit before starting? What do cherry-pick and am do
>> here when
As of v2.10.0-rc1-4-g321459439 ("cat-file: support --textconv/--filters
in batch mode"), t8010-cat-file-filters.sh has been failing on Cygwin.
Digging into this, the test looks to expose a timing window: it appears
that if `git cat-file --textconv --batch` receives input on stdin too
quickly, it fa
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy venit, vidit, dixit 23.08.2017 14:36:
> "git gc" when used in multiple worktrees ignore some per-worktree
> references: object references in the index, HEAD and reflog. This
> series fixes it by making the revision walker include these from all
> worktrees by default (and the s
Hallo lieve, mijn naam is Vivian Potter de enige dochter van Dr.
Johnson Potter, ik ben 21 jaar oud, kunnen we spreken beter
alstublieft. Ik heb iets te bespreken. Merci vervroegd.
Miss Vivian
*
Hi Mike,
On Thu, 24 Aug 2017, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:15:20PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 18 Aug 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> >
> > > Mike Hommey wrote[1]:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 03:06:37PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > > >> Mike Homm
Did you get my last message? reply me through: lilianbt...@gmail.com
Hi Martin,
On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 4:34 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Between these two steps:
> >
> >> - I reset hard, retry the merge, using --no-commit, rerere applies what
> >> it knows
> >> - I fix things up, then commit
> >
> > You'd tell re
Using Mail::Address made sense when we didn't have a proper parser. We
now have a reasonable address parser, and using Mail::Address
_if available_ causes much more trouble than it gives benefits:
* Developers typically test one version, not both.
* Users may not be aware that installing Mail::Ad
This is a followup over 9d33439 (send-email: only allow one address
per body tag, 2017-02-20). The first iteration did allow writting
Cc: # garbage
but did so by matching the regex ([^>]*>?), i.e. stop after the first
instance of '>'. However, it did not properly deal with
Cc: f...@example.
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:10:52AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 09:42:54AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 11:51:13PM -0700, Junio C
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Matthieu Moy writes:
>
>> +sub strip_garbage_one_address {
>> +my ($addr) = @_;
>> +chomp $addr;
>> +if ($addr =~ /^(("[^"]*"|[^"<]*)? *<[^>]*>).*/) {
>> +# "Foo Bar" [possibly garbage here]
>> +# Foo Bar [possibly garbage here]
>> +
Stefan Dotterweich wrote:
> When using filters, the commit list shows not only commits matching
> the filter criteria, but also boundary commits. When going through a
> list of say, all commits changing the variable `foo`, often half of
> the displayed commits are boundary commits. In this case t
Since f1068efefe (sha1_file: drop experimental GIT_USE_LOOKUP search,
2017-08-09)
the definition of sha1_entry_pos() has been removed from "sha1-lookup.c", so
there is no need anymore for its declaration in "sha1-lookup.h".
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder
---
sha1-lookup.h | 6 --
1 file ch
61 matches
Mail list logo
