Am 26.10.2012 19:55, schrieb Phil Hord:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Phil Hord wrote:
>>
>> Yes, thanks for catching that. I think I should add a test for that
>> except I notice that sync doesn't take any other flags useful for passing.
>
> Which, of course, suggests that I should not add
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Phil Hord wrote:
>
> Yes, thanks for catching that. I think I should add a test for that
> except I notice that sync doesn't take any other flags useful for passing.
Which, of course, suggests that I should not add this
flag-propagating-machinery to submodule-syn
Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 24.10.2012 01:15, schrieb Phil Hord:
>> The submodule sync command was somehow left out when
>> --recursive was added to the other submodule commands.
>>
>> Teach sync to handle the --recursive switch by recursing
>> when we're in a submodule we are sync'ing.
>>
>> Change
Am 24.10.2012 01:15, schrieb Phil Hord:
> The submodule sync command was somehow left out when
> --recursive was added to the other submodule commands.
>
> Teach sync to handle the --recursive switch by recursing
> when we're in a submodule we are sync'ing.
>
> Change the report during sync to sh
The submodule sync command was somehow left out when
--recursive was added to the other submodule commands.
Teach sync to handle the --recursive switch by recursing
when we're in a submodule we are sync'ing.
Change the report during sync to show submodule-path
instead of submodule-name to be cons
5 matches
Mail list logo