Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> So your plan is to play with stage history (eg merge commits) and from time
>> to time push such repaired history into official? From that time no changes
>> will be done to those commits in stage as well?
>
> Yes, the staging repo will always be based on the stable
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
>
> | Le 14/03/12 00:07, tomm...@lyx.org a écrit :
> >> Author: Tommaso Cucinotta
> >> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 23:05:36 +
> >> New Commit: 5ac1f9400f942e8c73927d6a8a68b3c64b6fa5b8
> >> URL:
> >> http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h
Am 15.03.2012 12:11, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn:
Merge branch '2.0.x' of git.lyx.org:lyx into 2.0.x
This has probably be caused by committing locally directly onto the 2.0.x
branch and doing a git
pull afterwards.
I don't know how I managed this. My other commits went through without an
Am 16.03.2012 00:54, schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Yes. Updated. But all of the po files has a bunch of obsolete entries at
bottom. Are there any benefit in keeping them around?
When LyX uses such strings again a remerge will then use also these entries to propose translations
in form of fuzzy
v...@lyx.org writes:
| Author: Vincent van Ravesteijn
| Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:58:52 +0100
| New Commit: 42aeab2aacce9fc5b7f55e6996c34f19143d64a9
| URL:
http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h=42aeab2aacce9fc5b7f55e6996c34f19143d64a9
>
| Log:
| Update autogenerated lib/layouttranslations.
Y
Richard Heck writes:
| On 03/14/2012 07:13 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Vincent van Ravesteijn writes:
>>
>> | How can you make your repo public ? (without the need of specifying
>> | all devs in the setperms)
>>
>> The special user "@all", gives every one with ssh keys access. "daemon"
>>
Vincent van Ravesteijn writes:
| If you keep the master branch clean, you can always safely 'git pull'.
| Whenever you want to push a feature to the repo, you rebase it onto,
| merge it into master and push.
Remember that is always safe to do a 'git fetch', and then you can use
gitk f.ex. to hav
On 16/03/2012 9:04 a.m., Richard Heck wrote:
On 03/14/2012 07:01 PM, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
I've been exporting LyX docs to plain text recently & the occasion
arose to export a master document as plain text. The master exported
as expected but the child docs didn't. The plain text master simply
On 03/14/2012 07:01 PM, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
I've been exporting LyX docs to plain text recently & the occasion
arose to export a master document as plain text. The master exported
as expected but the child docs didn't. The plain text master simply
includes messages like
[Include: newfile2.l
Having seen Andre put in an appearance, let me just mention here that
QtCreator has very good built-in support for git, under the Tools>Git menu.
Richard
On 03/15/2012 09:43 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Op 15-3-2012 14:01, Kornel Benko schreef:
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 13:37:11, schrieb Vincent van
Ravesteijn
Op 15-3-2012 13:25, Kornel Benko schreef:
git pull % sync your repo first
git merge myfeature % assuming you're on 2.0.x
On 03/15/2012 07:11 AM, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
When you want to push your changes to the lyx repo:
git pull % sync your repo first
git checkout myfeature
git rebase 2.0.x --or-- git rebase master
git push
And if I'm on the myfeature branch, this pushes to...what?
Richard
On 14/03/2012 02:05, Julien Rioux wrote:
I want it simple, and I want it centralized. It's nice to allow
private new repos to developers, thank you for that, but it seems
overkill to require their use. I honestly cannot be bothered at the
moment to setup remote repositories to fetch someone els
On 03/14/2012 07:13 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Vincent van Ravesteijn writes:
| How can you make your repo public ? (without the need of specifying
| all devs in the setperms)
The special user "@all", gives every one with ssh keys access. "daemon"
enables anon access through git://..., "gi
Op 15-3-2012 14:01, Kornel Benko schreef:
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 13:37:11, schrieb Vincent van
Ravesteijn
Op 15-3-2012 13:25, Kornel Benko schreef:
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 12:11:37, schrieb Vincent van
Ravesteijn
Op 15-3-2012 2:23, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
Author: Uwe Stö
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 13:37:11, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn
> Op 15-3-2012 13:25, Kornel Benko schreef:
> > Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 12:11:37, schrieb Vincent van
> > Ravesteijn
> >> Op 15-3-2012 2:23, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
> >>> Author: Uwe Stöhr
> >>> Date: Thu, 15 Mar
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 12:32:14, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn
> Op 15-3-2012 10:55, Kornel Benko schreef:
> > Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 01:25:16, schrieb Lars Gullik
> > Bjønnes
> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:20, Julien Rioux wrote:
> >>> Uwe, may I suggest to have two clones
Op 15-3-2012 13:25, Kornel Benko schreef:
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 12:11:37, schrieb Vincent van
Ravesteijn
Op 15-3-2012 2:23, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
Author: Uwe Stöhr
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:22:15 +0100
New Commit: 0e271180f91603a8547b652dd3da1e8f4deb8375
URL:
http://git.lyx.org
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 12:11:37, schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn
> Op 15-3-2012 2:23, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
> > Author: Uwe Stöhr
> > Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:22:15 +0100
> > New Commit: 0e271180f91603a8547b652dd3da1e8f4deb8375
> > URL:
> > http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h
Op 15-3-2012 10:57, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Fine. If I understand correctly the shift "stage"->"devel" stable can help
you to rewrite history (e.g. by merging fix of fix commits). So then we
would have 2 incompatible histories in two repos.
No, the staging repo has no
Op 15-3-2012 10:55, Kornel Benko schreef:
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 01:25:16, schrieb Lars Gullik
Bjønnes
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:20, Julien Rioux wrote:
Uwe, may I suggest to have two clones in two different folders. In one of
them you checkout 2.0.x, in the other you checkout maste
Op 15-3-2012 0:40, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
Author: uwestoehr
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:26:59 +0100
New Commit: 0bfe15d969b2d35732cf4d298c1be8ef6a3a2507
URL:
http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h=0bfe15d969b2d35732cf4d298c1be8ef6a3a2507
Log:
status.20x: some cosmetics as test commit
+- Gr
Op 15-3-2012 2:29, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
Author: Uwe Stöhr
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:29:47 +0100
New Commit: 7d200f302d4dd06fe7b595ea19b4154bd9a8e530
URL:
http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h=7d200f302d4dd06fe7b595ea19b4154bd9a8e530
Log:
GuiTabular.cpp: fix bug #8084
// apply
Op 15-3-2012 2:23, uwesto...@lyx.org schreef:
Author: Uwe Stöhr
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:22:15 +0100
New Commit: 0e271180f91603a8547b652dd3da1e8f4deb8375
URL:
http://git.lyx.org/?p=lyx.git;a=commit;h=0e271180f91603a8547b652dd3da1e8f4deb8375
Log:
Merge branch '2.0.x' of git.lyx.org:lyx into 2.0
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Fine. If I understand correctly the shift "stage"->"devel" stable can help
>> you to rewrite history (e.g. by merging fix of fix commits). So then we
>> would have 2 incompatible histories in two repos.
>
> No, the staging repo has no own fixed history.
So if I
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2012 um 01:25:16, schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:20, Julien Rioux wrote:
> > Uwe, may I suggest to have two clones in two different folders. In one of
> > them you checkout 2.0.x, in the other you checkout master. I have found that
> > switching
On 2012-03-12, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 03/12/2012 03:46 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
>> On 2012-03-11, Richard Heck wrote:
>>> [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: 7bit --]
>>> On 03/11/2012 04:46 AM, Zohair ABU SHABAN wrote:
Sure ... here's an example. Please see the attachment. Cheers.
>>> This is
27 matches
Mail list logo
