Peter Osterlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Added possibility to include diffstat output in exported patches.
Great. I had a plan to do this but I was busy with the push and
resolved commands. I will apply this patch.
Thanks.
--
Catalin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscr
Junio C Hamano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "PO" == Peter Osterlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> PO> I think it would be good if it was possible to include diffstat output
> PO> in exported patches, something like this:
>
> PO> Added possibility to include diffstat output in exported p
> "PO" == Peter Osterlund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
PO> I think it would be good if it was possible to include diffstat output
PO> in exported patches, something like this:
PO> Added possibility to include diffstat output in exported patches.
And you wuold want to do things similarly to wh
Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A new StGIT release is available from http://procode.org/stgit/
I think it would be good if it was possible to include diffstat output
in exported patches, something like this:
Added possibility to include diffstat output in exported patches.
Signe
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 21:17 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> I've found an unrelated problem. If I export patches with "stg export
> dirname", there are no diffs included in the patches. The patch
> description is all that is generated. If I omit the dirname parameter,
> the export works correctly t
Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 14:32 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> > I agree with the other comments, it's probably not wise to rely on
> > wiggle, and wiggle sometimes makes a mess. However, it often does the
> > right thing, and with a configurable merge pr
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 14:32 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> I agree with the other comments, it's probably not wise to rely on
> wiggle, and wiggle sometimes makes a mess. However, it often does the
> right thing, and with a configurable merge program and an undo
> function, this should not be a pr
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 14:32 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> I agree with the other comments, it's probably not wise to rely on
> wiggle, and wiggle sometimes makes a mess. However, it often does the
> right thing, and with a configurable merge program and an undo
> function, this should not be a pr
On 04 Jul 2005 14:32:36 +0200 Peter Osterlund wrote:
| Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 14:38 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
| > > Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > > > I know that using -A gives a more detailed output in case of a conflict.
| >
Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 14:38 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> > Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I know that using -A gives a more detailed output in case of a conflict.
> > > The problem is that you will get a conflict even if the chang
10 matches
Mail list logo