Wouldn't it have been simpler (and more generic) to keep the
original prototype for graph_log() and then just change:
command << sanitize(options.join(" "))
to:
command << options.shelljoin
?
//Peter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Christian Johansen
> Sent: den 12 mars 2013 10:58
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [gitorious] Log graph issues
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> I tracked this down to refnames with dots being "sanitized" and have the
> dots stripped. I changed the GitShell implementation to use Shellwords
> to properly escape the refnames, and now it works again.
>
> If you didn't have dots in the refnames where you didn't see a graph,
> let me know.
>
> On 2.x-stable:
> https://gitorious.org/gitorious/mainline/commit/941646757d0f9ac7732ee98cf966156f19ced6ef
> On next:
> https://gitorious.org/gitorious/mainline/commit/28af76c7e26b7af525199626111ffb22996d631e
>
> Christian
>
> Scott Allen writes:
>
> > On an internal private instance, user's have noticed that certain branches
> > are not being displayed with "log graph" feature, while other are. I found
> > I was able to reproduce this on gitorious.org. Are others seeing this issue?
> >
> > https://gitorious.org/gitorious/mainline/graph/2.x-stable
> >
> > -scott
--
--
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Gitorious" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
