The latest feature release Git v2.20.0 is now available at the usual
places. It is comprised of 962 non-merge commits since v2.19.0
(this is by far the largest release in v2.x.x series), contributed
by 83 people, 26 of which are new faces.
The tarballs are found at:
https://www.kernel.org/pu
On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 06:48:22PM -0800, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > Perhaps we should note this more prominently, and since Brandon isn't at
> > Google anymore can some of you working there edit this post? It's the
> > first Google result for "git protocol v2", so it's going to be quite
> > confusi
-cc linux list
> Perhaps we should note this more prominently, and since Brandon isn't at
> Google anymore can some of you working there edit this post? It's the
> first Google result for "git protocol v2", so it's going to be quite
> confusing for people if after 2.20 the instructions in it no l
On Sat, Dec 01 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * "git ls-remote $there foo" was broken by recent update for the
>protocol v2 and stopped showing refs that match 'foo' that are not
>refs/{heads,tags}/foo, which has been fixed.
>(merge 6a139cdd74 jk/proto-v2-ref-prefix-fix later to main
Team,
Git for Windows v2.20.0-rc2 is available here:
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/releases/tag/v2.20.0-rc2.windows.1
There is already one known issue: the size of the installer increased (see
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/issues/1963). This is in the
process of being addressed
Hi Junio,
> A release candidate Git v2.20.0-rc2 is now available for testing
> at the usual places. It is comprised of 934 non-merge commits
> since v2.19.0, contributed by 76 people, 25 of which are new faces.
Here are a few suggested tweaks after reading the draft release notes.
Nothing critic
A release candidate Git v2.20.0-rc2 is now available for testing
at the usual places. It is comprised of 934 non-merge commits
since v2.19.0, contributed by 76 people, 25 of which are new faces.
The tarballs are found at:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/testing/
The following pu
Johannes Schindelin writes ("Re: [PATCH] rebase: mark the C reimplementation as
an experimental opt-in feature (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1)"):
> I'll have to take a (lengthy) dinner break now, but this is what I have so
> far: a regression test that verifies the bre
Hi Ian,
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes ("Re: [PATCH] rebase: mark the C reimplementation
> as an experimental opt-in feature (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1)"):
> > > In a successful run with older git I get a reflog like this
Johannes Schindelin writes ("Re: [PATCH] rebase: mark the C reimplementation as
an experimental opt-in feature (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1)"):
> > In a successful run with older git I get a reflog like this:
> >
> >4833d74 HEAD@{0}: rebase finished: retur
Hi Ian,
On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes ("Re: [PATCH] rebase: mark the C reimplementation
> as an experimental opt-in feature (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1)"):
> > if you could pry more information (or better information) out of
Johannes Schindelin writes ("Re: [PATCH] rebase: mark the C reimplementation as
an experimental opt-in feature (was Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.20.0-rc1)"):
> if you could pry more information (or better information) out of that bug
> reporter, that would be nice. Apparently my
Hi Jonathan,
if you could pry more information (or better information) out of that bug
reporter, that would be nice. Apparently my email address is blacklisted
by his mail provider, so he is unlikely to have received my previous mail
(nor will he receive this one, I am sure).
Thanks,
Dscho
On We
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> Since I raised this 'should we hold off?' I thought I'd chime in and say
> that I'm fine with going along with what you suggest and having the
> builtin as the default in the final. IOW not merge
> jc/postpone-rebase-in-c down.
OK.
On Wed, Nov 28 2018, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>> At https://bugs.debian.org/914695 is a report of a test regression in
>> an outside project that is very likely to have been triggered by the
>> new faster rebase code.
>
> From lo
Hi Junio,
On Wed, 28 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > ...
> > In short, even a thorough study of the code (keeping in mind the few
> > tidbits of information provided by you) leaves me really wondering which
> > code you run, because it sure does not look like
Hi Jonathan,
On Tue, 27 Nov 2018, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> At https://bugs.debian.org/914695 is a report of a test regression in
> an outside project that is very likely to have been triggered by the
> new faster rebase code.
>From looking through that log.gz (without having a clue where the tes
Hi,
Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>>> Given that we're still finding regressions bugs in the rebase-in-C
>>> version should we be considering reverting 5541bd5b8f ("rebase: default
>>> to using the builtin rebase", 2018-08-08)?
>>>
>>> I love the feature, but fear that
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> ...
> In short, even a thorough study of the code (keeping in mind the few
> tidbits of information provided by you) leaves me really wondering which
> code you run, because it sure does not look like current `master` to me.
>
> And if it is not `master`, then I have
Elijah Newren writes:
> If we don't set rebase.useBuiltin to false, then there is also a minor
> regression in the error message printed by the built-in rebase we may
> want to try to address. I have a patch for it at
> <20181122044841.20993-2-new...@gmail.com>, but I don't know if that
> patch
Hi Ævar,
On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 21 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> > > * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C.
> >
> > Here's another regression in the C version (and rc
Hi Ævar,
On Sat, 24 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C.
>
> Here's another regression in the C version (and rc1), note: the
> sha1collisiondetection is just a stand in for "
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 11:37 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Unless I hear otherwise in the next 24 hours, I am planning to
> merge the following topics to 'master' before cutting -rc2. Please
> stop me on any of these topics.
>
> - jc/postpone-rebase-in-c
>
>This may be the most controversial
Unless I hear otherwise in the next 24 hours, I am planning to
merge the following topics to 'master' before cutting -rc2. Please
stop me on any of these topics.
- jc/postpone-rebase-in-c
This may be the most controversial. It demotes the C
reimplementation of "git rebase" to an experime
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
>>> * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C.
>>
>> Here's another regression in the C version (and rc1),...
>> I wasn't trying to stress test rebase. I was just wanting to rebase a
>> history I was about to force
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>> * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C.
>
> Here's another regression in the C version (and rc1),...
> I wasn't trying to stress test rebase. I was just wanting to rebase a
> history I was about to force-push after cleaning it up, hardl
On Wed, Nov 21 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * "git rebase" and "git rebase -i" have been reimplemented in C.
Here's another regression in the C version (and rc1), note: the
sha1collisiondetection is just a stand in for "some repo":
(
rm -rf /tmp/repo &&
git init /tmp/repo
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 10:58 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
wrote:
> There's a regression related to this that I wanted to send a headsup
> for, but don't have time to fix today. Now range-diff in format-patch
> includes --stat output. See e.g. my
> https://public-inbox.org/git/20181122132823.9883-1-
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:28:28AM -0800, Bryan Turner wrote:
> But that test code exists because Bitbucket Server provides a Java API
> [1][2] which allows third-party developers to easily build arbitrary
> Git commands to invoke for their own functionality. Setting
> `GitBranchCreateBuilder.refl
On Wed, Nov 21 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * The "--no-patch" option, which can be used to get a high-level
>overview without the actual line-by-line patch difference shown, of
>the "range-diff" command was earlier broken, which has been
>corrected.
There's a regression related t
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 6:20 AM Jeff King wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 03:17:07PM -0800, Bryan Turner wrote:
>
> > I've run 2.20.0-rc0 through the test matrix for Bitbucket Server on
> > both Linux and Windows, and the only failures were related to this
> > change:
> >
> > * "git branch -l "
A release candidate Git v2.20.0-rc1 is now available for testing
at the usual places. It is comprised of 915 non-merge commits
since v2.19.0, contributed by 73 people, 24 of which are new faces.
The tarballs are found at:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/testing/
The following pu
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 03:17:07PM -0800, Bryan Turner wrote:
> I've run 2.20.0-rc0 through the test matrix for Bitbucket Server on
> both Linux and Windows, and the only failures were related to this
> change:
>
> * "git branch -l " used to be a way to ask a reflog to be
>created while creat
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 12:57 PM Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
>
> Team,
>
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > An early preview release Git v2.20.0-rc0 is now available for
> > testing at the usual places. It is comprised of 887 non-merge
> > commits since v2.19.0, contributed by 71 p
Team,
On Sun, 18 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> An early preview release Git v2.20.0-rc0 is now available for
> testing at the usual places. It is comprised of 887 non-merge
> commits since v2.19.0, contributed by 71 people, 23 of which are
> new faces.
The "for Windows" flavor of Git v2.20.
An early preview release Git v2.20.0-rc0 is now available for
testing at the usual places. It is comprised of 887 non-merge
commits since v2.19.0, contributed by 71 people, 23 of which are
new faces.
The tarballs are found at:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/testing/
The followi
36 matches
Mail list logo
