This is a continuation of an earlier thread:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-01/msg00534.html
I suppose I have a different git style than Carl and Trevor;
I don't really see the value in keeping outdated branches.
Or put another way, I don't see the harm in keeping all my
bra
Carl Sorensen wrote Sunday, January 24, 2010 1:49 PM
On 1/23/10 11:10 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
I wrote a little shell script to rebase all my local git
branches at once.
So does the script rebase all branches in a repository? I'm sure
I wouldn't
like that; I have some branches that are u
On 1/24/10 6:49 AM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 1/23/10 11:10 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
>
>> I wrote a little shell script to rebase all my local git
>> branches at once. However, reading the git-pull man page
>> makes me wonder if there's not some tragedy waiting to
>> happen.
On 1/23/10 11:10 PM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
> I wrote a little shell script to rebase all my local git
> branches at once. However, reading the git-pull man page
> makes me wonder if there's not some tragedy waiting to
> happen. The script is designed for developers who are only
> tracking th
I wrote a little shell script to rebase all my local git
branches at once. However, reading the git-pull man page
makes me wonder if there's not some tragedy waiting to
happen. The script is designed for developers who are only
tracking the `master' branch (translators shouldn't rebase
too casual
