Hi Peff,
On Mon, 8 Aug 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 04:19:08PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > The fix is meant for jk/push-force-with-lease-creation topic, but I
> > > had to find it out by the old fashioned way, i.e. running blame for
> > > these lines in 'pu' to
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 04:19:08PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > The fix is meant for jk/push-force-with-lease-creation topic, but I
> > had to find it out by the old fashioned way, i.e. running blame for
> > these lines in 'pu' to find eee98e74f9 is the culprit and then
> > running "git b
Hi Junio,
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > The newly-added test case wants to commit a file "c.t" (note the lower
> > case) when a previous test case already committed a file "C.t". This
> > confuses Git to the point that it thinks "c.t" was not stag
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> The newly-added test case wants to commit a file "c.t" (note the lower
> case) when a previous test case already committed a file "C.t". This
> confuses Git to the point that it thinks "c.t" was not staged when "git
> add c.t" was called.
>
> Simply make the naming o
The newly-added test case wants to commit a file "c.t" (note the lower
case) when a previous test case already committed a file "C.t". This
confuses Git to the point that it thinks "c.t" was not staged when "git
add c.t" was called.
Simply make the naming of the test commits consistent with the pr
5 matches
Mail list logo
