Re: [PATCH v4] branch.c: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Guanglin Xu wrote: > to avoid a magic code of 11. > > Helped-by: Sun He > Helped-by: Eric Sunshine > Helped-by: Jacopo Notarstefano > > Signed-off-by: Guanglin Xu > --- > > This is an implementation of the idea#2 of GSoC 2014 microproject. > > branch.c | 8

Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Dmitry S. Dolzhenko wrote: > Dmitry S. Dolzhenko (11): > builtin/pack-objects.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in check_pbase_path() > bundle.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in add_to_ref_list() > cache-tree.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in find_subtree() > commit.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in regis

Re: [PATCH v4 12/27] *.sh: avoid hardcoding $GIT_DIR/hooks/...

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > If $GIT_COMMON_DIR is set, it should be $GIT_COMMON_DIR/hooks/, not > $GIT_DIR/hooks/. Just let rev-parse --git-path handle it. > > Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy > --- > git-am.sh | 22 +++---

Re: [PATCH] commit.c: Replace starts_with() with skip_prefix()

Thanks for the submission. Some commentary below to expose you to the review process on this project... On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:47 AM, Karthik Nayak wrote: > Replace with skip_prefix(), which uses the inbuilt function > strcmp() to compare. Explaining the purpose of the change is indeed importa

Re: [PATCH v4] branch.c: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Hi Eric, Yes, you're right. "!!" is comfortably concise and also idiomatic in Git sources. Thanks, Guanglin 2014-03-03 16:12 GMT+08:00 Eric Sunshine : > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:36 AM, Guanglin Xu wrote: >> to avoid a magic code of 11. >> >> Helped-by: Sun He >> Helped-by: Eric Sunshine >> H

Re: [PATCH] commit.c:record_author_date() use skip_prefix() instead of starts_with()

The format of this email is wrong. The non-commit-message notes should come between the "---" line (<- note, there are three minus signs here) and the patch itself. On 03/01/2014 08:48 PM, Tanay Abhra wrote: > Signed-off-by: Tanay Abhra > --- > commit.c |2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(

[PATCH v5] branch.c: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

to avoid a magic code of 11. Helped-by: Sun He Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Helped-by: Jacopo Notarstefano Signed-off-by: Guanglin Xu --- This is an implementation of the idea#2 of GSoC 2014 microproject. branch.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/branch.c

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

On 03/02/2014 04:55 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Eric Sunshine >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy >>> wrote: This is "rev-list style", where people can do "git rev-list -3" in addition to "git re

[PATCH v3] finish_tmp_packfile():use strbuf for pathname construction

The old version fixes a maximum length on the buffer, which could be a problem if one is not certain of the length of get_object_directory(). Using strbuf can avoid the protential bug. Helped-by: Michael Haggerty Helped-by: Eric Sunshine Signed-off-by: Sun He --- PATCH v3 adds the reason why w

Re: [PATCH v2] finish_tmp_packfile():use strbuf for pathname construction

2014-03-03 15:41 GMT+08:00 Eric Sunshine : > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:29 PM, Sun He wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Sun He >> Helped-by: Eric Sunshine >> Helped-by: Michael Haggerty >> --- >> >> This patch has assumed that you have already fix the bug of >> tmpname in builtin/pack-objects.c:write_pack

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Michael Haggerty writes: > Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last > NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably > accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to "HEAD~NUM". Makes sense to me. So, -NUM would actually mean "rebase the

[PATCH v3] Replace memcpy with hashcpy when dealing hash copy globally

Replacing memcpy with hashcpy is more directly and elegant. Leave ppc/sha1.c alone, as it is an isolated component. Pull cache.h(actually ../cache.h) in just for one memcpy there is not proper. Helped-by: Michael Haggerty Helped-by: Duy Nguyen Signed-off-by: Sun He --- PATCH v3 delete the one

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

Am 01.03.2014 07:54, schrieb Torsten Bögershausen: > On 2014-03-01 03.42, Lee Hopkins wrote: >> + >> +if(ignore_case) > Only looking at ignore_case here closes the door for people > who have a branch "foo" and "Foo" at the same time. > (Which means that they are carefully running git pack-refs)

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Michael Haggerty writes: > >> Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last >> NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably >> accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to "HEAD~NUM". >

Re: [PATCH 3/3] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

On 03/02/2014 10:09 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy >> wrote: >>> "git rebase -e XYZ" is basically the same as >>> >>> EDITOR="sed -i '1s/pick XYZ/edit XYZ/' $@" \ >>> git rebase -i XYZ^ >>> >

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Duy Nguyen writes: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Matthieu Moy > >> This would actually be a feature for me: I often want to rebase "recent >> enough" history, and when my @{upstream} isn't well positionned, I >> randomly type HEAD~N without remembering what N should be. When N is too >> small

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:37:11AM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Michael Haggerty writes: > > > Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last > > NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably > > accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to

Re: [PATCH 3/3] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote: > On 03/02/2014 10:09 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 4:04 AM, Eric Sunshine >> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy >>> wrote: "git rebase -e XYZ" is basically the same as EDIT

[PATCH 1/2] test-lib: tests skipped by GIT_SKIP_TESTS say so

We used to show "(missing )" next to tests skipped because they are specified in GIT_SKIP_TESTS. Use "(matched by GIT_SKIP_TESTS)" instead. --- t/test-lib.sh | 13 - 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/test-lib.sh b/t/test-lib.sh index 1531c24..89a405b 1

[PATCH 2/2] test-lib: GIT_TEST_ONLY to run only specific tests

This is a counterpart to GIT_SKIP_TESTS. Mostly useful when debugging. --- t/README | 15 +++ t/test-lib.sh |8 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/README b/t/README index caeeb9d..f939987 100644 --- a/t/README +++ b/t/README @@ -187,6

[PATCH] rev-parse --parseopt: option argument name hints

Built-in commands can specify names for option arguments, that are shown when usage text is generated for the command. sh based commands should be able to do the same. Option argument name hint is any text that comes after [*=?!] after the argument name up to the first whitespace. Underscores ar

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Duy Nguyen writes: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Matthieu Moy > wrote: >> Michael Haggerty writes: >> >>> Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last >>> NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably >>> accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM"

Re: [PATCH 3/3] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

Duy Nguyen writes: > Logically, yes. Practically, no. If you have to put multiple -e and > some hashes in one line, wouldn't editing to-do list in your favorite > editor be faster? An editor is the last resort when the card puncher is broken. -- David Kastrup -- To unsubscribe from this list:

My advice for GSoC applicants

Hi, Based on my experience so far as a first-time Google Summer of Code mentor, I just wrote a blog article containing some hopefully useful advice for students applying to the program. Please note that this is my personal opinion only and doesn't necessarily reflect the views of the Git/libgit2

submodules: reuse .git/modules/... for multiple checkouts of same URL

Hi, I have a git superproject with 3 submodules. The submodules are cloned from the same URL but use different branches. Git clones the repo three times and I have three entries in .git/modules. Is it possible to reuse the first clone for the next submodule clones? Stefan -- To unsubscribe fro

Re: submodules: reuse .git/modules/... for multiple checkouts of same URL

On Mar 3, 2014, at 7:24 AM, wrote: > I have a git superproject with 3 submodules. The submodules are cloned from > the same URL but use different branches. Git clones the repo three times and > I have three entries in .git/modules. Is it possible to reuse the first clone > for the next submodu

Re: [PATCH] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

2014-02-28 4:45 GMT+08:00 Dmitry S. Dolzhenko : > Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko > --- > attr.c | 7 +-- > builtin/pack-objects.c | 7 +-- > bundle.c | 6 +- > cache-tree.c | 6 +- > commit.c | 8 ++-- > diff.c

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

> I don't think this distinction is necessary, either you have a > case-insensitive file system or you don't. The case > that the .git directory is case-sensitive and the worktree directory isn't > (or the other way around) is > probably so exotic that we can ignore it. I think Torsten's use cas

Re: [PATCH] contrib/subtree - unset prefix before proceeding

Hi, Any chance to have this patch considered? Thanks in advance, _g. Gilles Filippini a écrit , Le 01/03/2014 17:33: > This is to prevent unwanted prefix when such an environment variable > exists. The case occurs for example during the Debian package build > where the git-subtree test suite is

[PATCH v2 2/2] i18n: assure command not corrupted by _() process

Separate message from command examples to avoid translation issues such as a dash being omitted in a translation. Signed-off-by: Sandy Carter --- builtin/branch.c | 10 ++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c index b4d7716..b30

[PATCH] submodule : Add --no-separate-git-dir option to add and update command.

This new option prevent git submodule to clone the missing submodules with the --separate-git-dir option. Then the submodule will be regular repository and their gitdir will not be placed in the superproject gitdir/modules directory. Signed-off-by: Henri GEIST --- Documentation/git-submodule.tx

[PATCH v2 1/2] i18n: proposed command missing leading dash

Add missing leading dash to proposed commands in french output when using the command: git branch --set-upstream remotename/branchname and when upstream is gone Signed-off-by: Sandy Carter --- po/fr.po | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/po/fr.po b/po/fr.p

Re: [PATCH 1/2] test-lib: tests skipped by GIT_SKIP_TESTS say so

From: "Ilya Bobyr" We used to show "(missing )" next to tests skipped because they are specified in GIT_SKIP_TESTS. Use "(matched by GIT_SKIP_TESTS)" instead. The message below forgets the "by". Otherwise looks sensible. --- t/test-lib.sh | 13 - 1 files changed, 8 insertions(

Re: [PATCH] commit.c: Replace starts_with() with skip_prefix()

Hello Eric, Thanks for Pointing out everything, i had a thorough look and fixed a couple of things. Here is an Updated Patch. - Removed unnecessary code and variables. - Replaced all instances of starts_with() with skip_prefix() Replace starts_with() with skip_prefix() for better reading purposes.

Re: [PATCH 2/2] test-lib: GIT_TEST_ONLY to run only specific tests

Minor nits. From: "Ilya Bobyr" This is a counterpart to GIT_SKIP_TESTS. Mostly useful when debugging. --- t/README | 15 +++ t/test-lib.sh |8 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/README b/t/README index caeeb9d..f939987 100644 --- a/

[PATCH V2] commit.c: Use skip_prefix() instead of starts_with()

In record_author_date() & parse_gpg_output() ,using skip_prefix() instead of starts_with() is more elegant and abstracts away the details. Helped-by: Michael Haggerty Signed-off-by: Tanay Abhra --- Patch V2 Corrected email formatting ,reapplied the implementation according to suggestions.

[PATCH] cache_tree_find(): remove redundant check in while condition

Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty --- A trivial little cleanup. cache-tree.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c index 0bbec43..7f63c23 100644 --- a/cache-tree.c +++ b/cache-tree.c @@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ static struct cache_tree *cache_tree_

Re: [PATCH] cache_tree_find(): remove redundant check in while condition

Michael Haggerty writes: > Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty > --- > A trivial little cleanup. > > cache-tree.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c > index 0bbec43..7f63c23 100644 > --- a/cache-tree.c > +++ b/cache-tree.c > @@ -565,

Re: My advice for GSoC applicants

From: "Michael Haggerty" Cc: "Dmitry Dolzhenko" ; "Sun He" ; "Brian Gesiak" ; "Tanay Abhra" ; "Kyriakos Georgiou" ; "Siddharth Goel" ; "Guanglin Xu" ; "Karthik Nayak" ; "Alberto Corona" ; "Jacopo Notarstefano" Hi, Based on my experience so far as a first-time Google Summer of Code mentor, I j

Re: [PATCH] cache_tree_find(): remove redundant check in while condition

On 03/03/2014 05:32 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > [...] > So perhaps all of that should just be > > while (*slash == '/') > slash++; > if (!*slash) > return it; > I just fixed a little thing that caught my eye. You OWNED it.

Re: My advice for GSoC applicants

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote: > My secret tip for GSoC success > > http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-secret-tip-for-gsoc-success.html I enjoyed reading that BLOG post. I daresay some of the points you raise are pertinent for any new contributor to any open

Re: [PATCH] cache_tree_find(): remove redundant check in while condition

Michael Haggerty writes: > On 03/03/2014 05:32 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> [...] >> So perhaps all of that should just be >> >> while (*slash == '/') >> slash++; >> if (!*slash) >> return it; >> > > I just fixed a little thing

Re: [PATCH] submodule : Add --no-separate-git-dir option to add and update command.

Am 03.03.2014 14:47, schrieb Henri GEIST: > This new option prevent git submodule to clone the missing > submodules with the --separate-git-dir option. > Then the submodule will be regular repository and their gitdir will not > be placed in the superproject gitdir/modules directory. And what is y

Re: [PATCH v3 01/25] path.c: make get_pathname() return strbuf instead of static buffer

Duy Nguyen writes: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Is there a reason not to do just an equivalent of >> >> #define git_pathdup mkpathdup >> >> and be done with it? Am I missing something? > > They have a subtle difference: mkpathdup() calls cleanup_path() while >

Re: Branch Name Case Sensitivity

Lee Hopkins writes: > I went ahead and took a stab at a solution. My solution is more > aggressive than a warning, I actually prevent the creation of > ambiguous refs. My changes are also in refs.c, which may not be > appropriate, but it seemed like the natural place. > > I have never contributed

Re: [PATCH v3 07/25] reflog: avoid constructing .lock path with git_path

Duy Nguyen writes: > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: >> >>> git_path() soon understands the path given to it. Some paths "abc" may >>> become "def" while other "ghi" may become "ijk". We don't want >>> git_path() to interfere with .lock pa

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

Jeff King writes: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:45:39AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > Exactly. The two features (bitmaps and .keep) are not compatible with >> > each other, so you have to prioritize one. If you are using static .keep >> > files, you might want them to continue being respecte

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:13:47AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Or the flip side: if the user wants to use .keep, we should drop > > bitmaps. My point is that we do not know which way the user wants to > > go, so we should not tie the options together. > > Hmph. I think the short of your lat

Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

Michael Haggerty writes: > On 02/28/2014 10:29 AM, Dmitry S. Dolzhenko wrote: >> Thank you for your remarks. In this patch I tried to take them into account. >> >> Dmitry S. Dolzhenko (11): >> builtin/pack-objects.c: change check_pbase_path() to use ALLOC_GROW() >> bundle.c: change add_to_re

Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] builtin/pack-objects.c: change check_pbase_path() to use ALLOC_GROW()

Jeff King writes: > I realize that I just bikeshedded on subject lines for half a page, and > part of me wants to go kill myself in shame. But I feel like I see the > technique misapplied often enough that maybe some guidance is merited. Thanks. What I queued read like these: $ git shortlog ..

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

Faiz Kothari writes: > Signed-off-by: Faiz Kothari > --- > Implemented write_or_die.c:strbuf_write_or_die() and used in relevant places > to substitute write_or_die(). I spotted other places where strbuf can be used > in place of buf[MAX_PATH] but that would require a change in prototype of a >

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

Eric Sunshine writes: > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:51 AM, He Sun wrote: >> 2014-03-01 19:21 GMT+08:00 Faiz Kothari : >>> diff --git a/remote-curl.c b/remote-curl.c >>> index 10cb011..dee8716 100644 >>> --- a/remote-curl.c >>> +++ b/remote-curl.c >>> @@ -634,7 +634,7 @@ static int rpc_service(struc

Re: An idea for "git bisect" and a GSoC enquiry

Jacopo Notarstefano writes: > Here my proposal differs in that I have no way of knowing which label > is good and which label is bad: I blindly accept two distinct labels > and bisect with those. I gave an example of this behaviour above. I think you fundamentally cannot use two labels that are

Rewriting git history during git-svn conversion

Hi, I am converting my team's SVN server to GIT but they aren't ready to transition yet. People are still working out of SVN, so I need to keep the git-svn clone around to do 'git svn fetch' to continue to keep it synchronized with SVN. Once everyone is ready to switch, and after converting all o

Re: [PATCH] commit.c:record_author_date() use skip_prefix() instead of starts_with()

Michael Haggerty writes: >> -if (!starts_with(buf, "author ")) { >> +if (!skip_prefix(buf, "author ")) { > > If this is the only change, there is not much point, is there? How does > this help? Perhaps there is some way to take advantage of the > difference between start

Re: [PATCH v3] write_pack_file: use correct variable in diagnostic

Sun He writes: > 'pack_tmp_name' is the subject of the utime() check, so report it in the > warning, not the uninitialized 'tmpname' > > Signed-off-by: Sun He > --- > > Changing the subject and adding valid information as tutored by > Eric Sunshine. > Thanks to him. > > builtin/pack-objects

Fwd: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > >> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:51 AM, He Sun wrote: >>> 2014-03-01 19:21 GMT+08:00 Faiz Kothari : diff --git a/remote-curl.c b/remote-curl.c index 10cb011..dee8716 100644 --- a/remote-curl.c +++ b/r

Re: [PATCH v2] branch.c: change install_branch_config() to use skip_prefix()

Eric Sunshine writes: >> diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c >> index 723a36b..ca4e824 100644 >> --- a/branch.c >> +++ b/branch.c >> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int should_setup_rebase(const char *origin) >> void install_branch_config(int flag, const char *local, const char *origin, >> const char *re

Re: [PATCH] git-config: document interactive.singlekey requires Term::Readkey

Simon Ruderich writes: > Most distributions don't require Term::Readkey as dependency, > leaving the user to wonder why the setting doesn't work. > > Signed-off-by: Simon Ruderich Thanks, but is it true that interactive.singlekey "requries" Term::ReadKey? The relevant part of git-add--interact

Re: [PATCH v3] skip_prefix: rewrite so that prefix is scanned once

Siddharth Goel writes: > Helped-by: Eric Sunshine > Signed-off-by: Siddharth Goel > --- > Added a space after colon in the subject as compared to previous > patch [PATCH v2]. > > [PATCH v2]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/243150 Whenever you see "Change", "Rewrite", et

Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

Eric Sunshine writes: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Dmitry S. Dolzhenko > wrote: >> Dmitry S. Dolzhenko (11): >> builtin/pack-objects.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in check_pbase_path() >> bundle.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in add_to_ref_list() >> cache-tree.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in find_subtree() >> co

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:09:08AM -0700, Nasser Grainawi wrote: > >> > Exactly. The two features (bitmaps and .keep) are not compatible with >> > each other, so you have to prioritize one. If you are using static .keep >> > files, you might wan

Re: [PATCH] submodule : Add --no-separate-git-dir option to add and update command.

[CC'ing the submodule area experts.] Henri GEIST writes: > This new option prevent git submodule to clone the missing > submodules with the --separate-git-dir option. > Then the submodule will be regular repository and their gitdir will not > be placed in the superproject gitdir/modules directo

Re: [PATCH V2] commit.c: Use skip_prefix() instead of starts_with()

Tanay Abhra writes: > In record_author_date() & parse_gpg_output() ,using skip_prefix() instead of > starts_with() is more elegant and abstracts away the details. Avoid subjective judgement like "more elegant" when justifying your change; you are not your own judge. The caller of starts_with()

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > >> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:51 AM, He Sun wrote: >>> 2014-03-01 19:21 GMT+08:00 Faiz Kothari : diff --git a/remote-curl.c b/remote-curl.c index 10cb011..dee8716 100644 --- a/remote-curl.c +++ b/re

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

Jeff King writes: > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:13:47AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > Or the flip side: if the user wants to use .keep, we should drop >> > bitmaps. My point is that we do not know which way the user wants to >> > go, so we should not tie the options together. >> >> Hmph. I

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

Eric Sunshine writes: > As a potential GSoC student and newcomer to the project, Faiz would > not have known that this would be considered unwanted churn when he > chose the task from the GSoC microproject page [1]. Perhaps it would > be a good idea to retire this item from the list? > > On the o

Re: [PATCH] commit.c:record_author_date() use skip_prefix() instead of starts_with()

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael Haggerty writes: > >>> -if (!starts_with(buf, "author ")) { >>> +if (!skip_prefix(buf, "author ")) { >> >> If this is the only change, there is not much point, is there? How does >> this help? Perhaps there

Re: [PATCH 2/2] branch: use skip_prefix

Jeff King writes: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:04:19PM +0900, Brian Gesiak wrote: > >> From: modocache > > Both your emailed patches have this, which is due to your author name > not matching your sending identity. You probably want to set user.name, > or if you already have (which it looks like

Re: [PATCH] repack: add `repack.honorpackkeep` config var

On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 11:51:06AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Yes. Do you need a re-roll from me? I think the last version I sent + > > the squash to tie the default to bitmap-writing makes the most sense. > > I have 9e20b390 (repack: add `repack.packKeptObjects` config var, > 2014-02-26);

Re: RFC GSoC idea: new "git config" features

Jeff King writes: > Most callbacks would convert to a query system in a pretty > straightforward way, but some that have side effects might be tricky. > Converting them all may be too large for a GSoC project, but I think you > could do it gradually: > > 1. Convert the parser to read into an in

Re: [PATCH 3/3] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > "git rebase -e XYZ" is basically the same as > > EDITOR="sed -i '1s/pick XYZ/edit XYZ/' $@" \ > git rebase -i XYZ^ > > In English, it prepares the todo list for you to edit only commit XYZ > to save your time. The time saving is only si

Re: [PATCH] submodule : Add --no-separate-git-dir option to add and update command.

Le lundi 03 mars 2014 à 17:45 +, Jens Lehmann a écrit : > Am 03.03.2014 14:47, schrieb Henri GEIST: > > This new option prevent git submodule to clone the missing > > submodules with the --separate-git-dir option. > > Then the submodule will be regular repository and their gitdir will not > >

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

Eric Sunshine writes: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Eric Sunshine writes: >> >>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 7:51 AM, He Sun wrote: 2014-03-01 19:21 GMT+08:00 Faiz Kothari : > diff --git a/remote-curl.c b/remote-curl.c > index 10cb011..dee8716 100644 >

Re: [PATCH v2] git-config: document interactive.singlekey requires Term::ReadKey

Most distributions don't require Term::ReadKey as dependency, leaving the user to wonder why the setting doesn't work. Signed-off-by: Simon Ruderich --- On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 10:58:58AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Thanks, but is it true that interactive.singlekey "requries" > Term::ReadKey?

[PATCH] git-add--interactive: warn if module for interactive.singlekey is missing

Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano Signed-off-by: Simon Ruderich --- git-add--interactive.perl | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/git-add--interactive.perl b/git-add--interactive.perl index 24bb1ab..d3bca12 100755 --- a/git-add--interactive.perl +++ b/git-add--interactive.perl @@ -

Help needed: Tests failed While replacing char array with strbuf in bulk-checkin.c

Hi , I am trying do complete the microproject 4, inorder to apply to GSOC. I have made the below changes: https://gist.github.com/anhsirksai/9334565 Post my changes compilation is succes in the source directory. But when I ran the tests[make in t/ directory] my tests are failing saying " fre

Re: [PATCH] implemented strbuf_write_or_die()

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: >> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Eric Sunshine writes: It's not obvious from the patch fragment, but 'heads' is not a strbuf, so Faiz correctly left this invocation alone. >>> >>>

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Michael Haggerty writes: > This might be a reason that "-NUM" is a bad idea. > > Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last > NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably > accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to "HEAD~NUM". That

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Matthieu Moy writes: > Michael Haggerty writes: > >> Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last >> NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably >> accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to "HEAD~NUM". > > Makes sense to me. So, -NUM

Re: Help needed: Tests failed While replacing char array with strbuf in bulk-checkin.c

On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM, saikrishna.sripada wrote: > I am trying do complete the microproject 4, inorder to apply to GSOC. > I have made the below changes: > > https://gist.github.com/anhsirksai/9334565 > > Post my changes compilation is succes in the source directory. > But when I ran the

[PATCH v4 00/14] Use ALLOC_GROW() instead of inline code

This version differs from previous [1] the following changes: - added three new commits with similar changes in "builtin/mktree.c", "cache-tree.c" and "sha1_file.c". - updated commit messages: "use ALLOC_GROW() in function_name()" instead of "change function_name() to use ALLOC_GROW()"

[PATCH v4 08/14] replace_object.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in register_replace_object()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- replace_object.c | 8 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/replace_object.c b/replace_object.c index cdcaf8c..843deef 100644 --- a/replace_object.c +++ b/replace_object.c @@ -36,12 +36,8 @@ static int register_replace_object

[PATCH v4 10/14] dir.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in create_simplify()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- dir.c | 5 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c index 98bb50f..4ae38e4 100644 --- a/dir.c +++ b/dir.c @@ -1341,10 +1341,7 @@ static struct path_simplify *create_simplify(const char **pathspec) for (nr =

[PATCH v4 03/14] cache-tree.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in find_subtree()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- cache-tree.c | 6 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c index 0bbec43..30149d1 100644 --- a/cache-tree.c +++ b/cache-tree.c @@ -75,11 +75,7 @@ static struct cache_tree_sub *find_subtree(struct cache_t

[PATCH v4 11/14] attr.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in handle_attr_line()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- attr.c | 7 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/attr.c b/attr.c index 8d13d70..734222d 100644 --- a/attr.c +++ b/attr.c @@ -338,12 +338,7 @@ static void handle_attr_line(struct attr_stack *res, a = parse_attr_line(lin

[PATCH v4 06/14] diffcore-rename.c: use ALLOC_GROW()

Use ALLOC_GROW() instead inline code in locate_rename_dst() and register_rename_src() Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- diffcore-rename.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/diffcore-rename.c b/diffcore-rename.c index 9b4f068..fbf3272 100644 ---

[PATCH v4 05/14] diff.c: use ALLOC_GROW()

Use ALLOC_GROW() instead inline code in diffstat_add() and diff_q() Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- diff.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c index e800666..aebdfda 100644 --- a/diff.c +++ b/diff.c @@ -1361,11 +1361,7 @@ stati

[PATCH v4 02/14] bundle.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in add_to_ref_list()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- bundle.c | 6 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/bundle.c b/bundle.c index e99065c..1388a3e 100644 --- a/bundle.c +++ b/bundle.c @@ -14,11 +14,7 @@ static const char bundle_signature[] = "# v2 git bundle\n"; static void add_

[PATCH v4 01/14] builtin/pack-objects.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in check_pbase_path()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- builtin/pack-objects.c | 9 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/pack-objects.c b/builtin/pack-objects.c index c733379..0ffad6f 100644 --- a/builtin/pack-objects.c +++ b/builtin/pack-objects.c @@ -1213,12 +1213,9 @@

[PATCH v4 14/14] sha1_file.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in pretend_sha1_file()

Helped-by: He Sun Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- sha1_file.c | 7 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/sha1_file.c b/sha1_file.c index 019628a..3cb17b8 100644 --- a/sha1_file.c +++ b/sha1_file.c @@ -2624,12 +2624,7 @@ int pretend_sha1_file(void *buf, unsig

[PATCH v4 04/14] commit.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in register_commit_graft()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- commit.c | 8 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c index 6bf4fe0..e004314 100644 --- a/commit.c +++ b/commit.c @@ -147,12 +147,8 @@ int register_commit_graft(struct commit_graft *graft, int ignore_dups)

[PATCH v4 13/14] read-cache.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in add_index_entry()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- read-cache.c | 6 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c index fb440b4..cbdf954 100644 --- a/read-cache.c +++ b/read-cache.c @@ -990,11 +990,7 @@ int add_index_entry(struct index_state *istate, struct

[PATCH v4 07/14] patch-ids.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in add_commit()

Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- patch-ids.c | 5 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/patch-ids.c b/patch-ids.c index bc8a28f..bf81b92 100644 --- a/patch-ids.c +++ b/patch-ids.c @@ -83,10 +83,7 @@ static struct patch_id *add_commit(struct commit *commit,

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rebase: accept - as another way of saying HEAD~

Junio C Hamano writes: > Matthieu Moy writes: > >> Michael Haggerty writes: >> >>> Or perhaps "-NUM" should fail with an error message if any of the last >>> NUM commits are merges. In that restricted scenario (which probably >>> accounts for 99% of rebases), "-NUM" is equivalent to "HEAD~NUM"

Re: My advice for GSoC applicants

Michael Haggerty writes: > Based on my experience so far as a first-time Google Summer of Code > mentor, I just wrote a blog article containing some hopefully useful > advice for students applying to the program. Please note that this is > my personal opinion only and doesn't necessarily reflect

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 06:04:39AM +0900, Brian Gesiak wrote: > My name is Brian Gesiak. I'm a research student at the University of > Tokyo, and I'm hoping to participate in this year's Google Summer of > Code by contributing to Git. I'm a longtime user, first-time > contributor--some of you may

[PATCH v4 09/14] reflog-walk.c: use ALLOC_GROW()

Use ALLOC_GROW() instead inline code in add_commit_info() and read_one_reflog() Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- reflog-walk.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/reflog-walk.c b/reflog-walk.c index b2fbdb2..2899729 100644 --- a/reflog-walk.c +

[PATCH v4 12/14] builtin/mktree.c: use ALLOC_GROW() in append_to_tree()

Helped-by: He Sun Signed-off-by: Dmitry S. Dolzhenko --- builtin/mktree.c | 5 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/mktree.c b/builtin/mktree.c index f92ba40..a964d6b 100644 --- a/builtin/mktree.c +++ b/builtin/mktree.c @@ -23,10 +23,7 @@ static void append_

Re: [PATCH v3] skip_prefix: rewrite so that prefix is scanned once

Junio C Hamano writes: > Siddharth Goel writes: > >> Helped-by: Eric Sunshine >> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Goel >> --- >> Added a space after colon in the subject as compared to previous >> patch [PATCH v2]. >> >> [PATCH v2]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/243150 > > Wh

  1   2   >