only check out trunk if you don't want the tags
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:31:35AM +0200, clemens fischer wrote:
> Thomas Adam wrote:
>
> > Were you just guessing? This works just fine:
>
> Yeah, kinda. I often clone from github, but was too lazy to look at the
> various .git/config's for the
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 12:31:35AM +0200, clemens fischer wrote:
> Thomas Adam wrote:
>
> > Were you just guessing? This works just fine:
>
> Yeah, kinda. I often clone from github, but was too lazy to look at the
> various .git/config's for the right URL's.
>
> > [/tmp]% git clone git://githu
Thomas Adam wrote:
> Were you just guessing? This works just fine:
Yeah, kinda. I often clone from github, but was too lazy to look at the
various .git/config's for the right URL's.
> [/tmp]% git clone git://github.com/ThomasAdam/tmux.git
> Cloning into tmux...
> remote: Counting objects: 1530
It's hard to say for sure since my clone is already up to date,
but i don't get any errors (it says I'm "already up to date").
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Thomas Adam wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:14:03PM +0200, clemens fischer wrote:
> > On Thu-2011/05/26-23:39 Thomas Adam wrote
> >
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 11:14:03PM +0200, clemens fischer wrote:
> On Thu-2011/05/26-23:39 Thomas Adam wrote
> (MID <20110526213903.GA2501@debian.ttn6tadam>):
>
> > For anyone playing along at home and was tracking my git clone of
> > this, I've archived the previous repository and created the new
On Thu-2011/05/26-23:39 Thomas Adam wrote
(MID <20110526213903.GA2501@debian.ttn6tadam>):
> For anyone playing along at home and was tracking my git clone of
> this, I've archived the previous repository and created the new one
> with the same URL:
>
> https://github.com/ThomasAdam/tmux
>
> But
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:00:48PM +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote:
> tmux is now using svn as primary version control on SF.
>
> To checkout do:
>
> $ svn co http://tmux.svn.sf.net/svnroot/tmux/trunk tmux
>
> If you need to commit, use https instead, SF has information.
>
> We'll see how this g