Re: [PATCH] Teach rm to remove submodules when given with a trailing '/'

Am 10/30/2012 22:28, schrieb Jens Lehmann: > Am 29.10.2012 08:11, schrieb Johannes Sixt: >> Am 10/29/2012 0:28, schrieb Jens Lehmann: >>> + /* Remove trailing '/' from directories to find submodules in the index >>> */ >>> + for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) { >>> + size_t pathlen = strlen(

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > Thanks for the thorough explanation. Perhaps some of that could make > it's way into the commit message? It's fine with me if it doesn't, since the original commit message covers the basics (current behavior and intent of the change) in its first two paragraphs and anyon

Nike free run shoes are designed for different work

Boost the selection of shoes Nike free run indefinitely. A lot of people on the planet every day wearing a nike free run shoes. You will find there's huge selection of species. The Nike free run footwear history there has been great adjustm

Re: [PATCH] git-push: update remote tags only with force

Hi, (again because the mailing list rejected it) (Gmal switched interface and HTML is the default) On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 6:37 AM, Chris Rorvick wrote: > > References are allowed to update from one commit-ish to another if the > former is a ancestor of the latter. This behavior is oriented to

[PATCH] git-push: update remote tags only with force

References are allowed to update from one commit-ish to another if the former is a ancestor of the latter. This behavior is oriented to branches which are expected to move with commits. Tag references are expected to be static in a repository, though, thus an update to a tag (lightweight and anno

Abercrombie has become through this great site

The Abercrombie brand dedication of this kind of a higher level of good results. abercrombie and fitch clothing webpage previously has everything, your option. You can be in the position to see the garments of your respective own alternative. The c

Re: [PATCH] test-lib: avoid full path to store test results

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not >> that easy when you want those explanations to be actually true, and >> corrent--you have to spend time to make sure of that. > > That's wh

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:51 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >>It's not my job to >> explain to you that 'git fast-export' doesn't work this way, you have >> a command line to type those commands and see for yourself if the

Re: [PATCH] test-lib: avoid full path to store test results

Felipe Contreras wrote: > It's all fun and games to write explanations for things, but it's not > that easy when you want those explanations to be actually true, and > corrent--you have to spend time to make sure of that. That's why it's useful for the patch submitter to write them, asking for he

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> --- a/builtin/fast-export.c >> +++ b/builtin/fast-export.c >> @@ -523,11 +523,16 @@ static void get_tags_and_duplicates(struct >> object_array *pending, >> typename(e->item->type))

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 1:11 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > (cc-ing the git list) > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> When an object has already been exported (and thus is in the marks) it >> is flagged as SHOWN, so it will not be exported again, even if this time >> it's exported through a different ref

Re: [PATCH] test-lib: avoid full path to store test results

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:27 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> > Felipe Contreras wrote: > No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras >>> >>> "No r

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: >It's not my job to > explain to you that 'git fast-export' doesn't work this way, you have > a command line to type those commands and see for yourself if they do > what you think they do with a vanilla version of git. Th

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> I don't think it's my job to explain to you how 'git fast-export' >> works. > > Actually, if you are submitting a patch for inclusion, it is your job > to explain to future readers what the patch does. That's a

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > This might help you, or other people involved in the problem, but not > anybody else. Ok, I give up. Bye. Sometimes the author of some code and the right person to interact with the development community by submitting and maintaining it are not the same person. Hopefu

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> --- a/builtin/fast-export.c >> +++ b/builtin/fast-export.c >> @@ -523,11 +523,16 @@ static void get_tags_and_duplicates(struct >> object_array *pending, >> typename(e->item->type))

Re: [PATCH] test-lib: avoid full path to store test results

Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 5:46 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Felipe Contreras wrote: >>> No reason to use the full path in case this is used externally. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras >> >> "No reason not to" is not a reason to do anything. What symptoms does >

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Hi, On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> They have been marked as UNINTERESTING for a reason, lets respect that. > > So, the above description conveyed zero information, as you mentioned. I meant, this, of course: >> They have been marked as UNIN

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > I don't think it's my job to explain to you how 'git fast-export' > works. Actually, if you are submitting a patch for inclusion, it is your job to explain to future readers what the patch does. Yes, the reader might not be deeply familiar with the part of fast-export y

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> Nope. I just don't want regressions, and found a patch description >>> that did nothing to explain to the reader how it avoids regressions >>> more

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Hi again, Felipe Contreras wrote: > They have been marked as UNINTERESTING for a reason, lets respect that. So, the above description conveyed zero information, as you mentioned. A clearer explanation would be the following: fast-export: don't emit "reset" command for negative refs

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

Felipe Contreras wrote: > --- a/builtin/fast-export.c > +++ b/builtin/fast-export.c > @@ -523,11 +523,16 @@ static void get_tags_and_duplicates(struct object_array > *pending, > typename(e->item->type)); > continue; > } > -

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

(cc-ing the git list) Felipe Contreras wrote: > When an object has already been exported (and thus is in the marks) it > is flagged as SHOWN, so it will not be exported again, even if this time > it's exported through a different ref. > > We don't need the object to be exported again, but we want

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Nope. I just don't want regressions, and found a patch description >> that did nothing to explain to the reader how it avoids regressions >> more than a little disturbing. > > I see, so you don't have any speci

Re: Links broken in ref docs.

I just checked and the issue seems to be fixed! Clicked around on a bunch of previously broken links and they work! On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:38 AM, Holger Hellmuth (IKS) wrote: > Am 30.10.2012 09:07, schrieb Mike Norman: > >> Not seen any recently. I'm guessing the dev is in the path of >> hurri

Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] completion: add new __gitcompadd helper

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 02:41:21AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 7:28 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 05:52:49PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > >> diff --git a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash > >> b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash

Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] completion: add new __gitcompadd helper

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:58 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:45:41AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> The idea is to never touch the COMPREPLY variable directly. >> >> This allows other completion systems override __gitcompadd, and do >> something different instead. >> >> Al

Re: [PATCH 1/2] completion: refactor __gitcomp related tests

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:45 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:39:00AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> Lots of duplicated code! >> >> No functional changes. > > I'm not sure. > I'm all for removing duplicated application code, but I'm usually more > conservative when it comes

Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] completion: add new __gitcompadd helper

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:45:41AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: > The idea is to never touch the COMPREPLY variable directly. > > This allows other completion systems override __gitcompadd, and do > something different instead. > > Also, this allows the simplification of the completion tests (s

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Felipe Contreras > wrote: >> Which is expected and correct; the branch already points to the right >> commit, no need for an extra reset. > > I think you're correct. Thanks for confirming. Thanks for rev

Re: [PATCH 1/2] completion: refactor __gitcomp related tests

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:39:00AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Lots of duplicated code! > > No functional changes. I'm not sure. I'm all for removing duplicated application code, but I'm usually more conservative when it comes to test code. The more logic, the more possibility for bugs in t

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Which is expected and correct; the branch already points to the right > commit, no need for an extra reset. I think you're correct. Thanks for confirming. -- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "uns

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:07 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> Well, that's what we have now, and you want to preserve this "feature" >> (aka bug), right? > > Nope. I just don't want regressions, and found a patch description > that did nothing to explain to the reader ho

Re: change symlink

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > shawn wilson writes: > >> and once it's added, status says: >> # renamed:t2 -> t2/one/test >> >> that's not exactly true, but... > > What's wrong with it? Both files have the same contents, which is the > link target for symlink

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Felipe Contreras > wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Sverre Rabbelier >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Felipe Contreras >>> wrote: Why would it? We are not changing the wa

Re: [PATCH] test-lib: avoid full path to store test results

Thanks. I know that posix support these usages, but exists some traditional shell that not support it. These are described in the autoconf manual, last time i have checked. As the construct ; export var = x should be portable, but it is not. If this is important these days i don't know. Best 201

Re: change symlink

shawn wilson writes: > and once it's added, status says: > # renamed:t2 -> t2/one/test > > that's not exactly true, but... What's wrong with it? Both files have the same contents, which is the link target for symlinks. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key finge

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > Well, that's what we have now, and you want to preserve this "feature" > (aka bug), right? Nope. I just don't want regressions, and found a patch description that did nothing to explain to the reader how it avoids regressions more than a little disturbing. I also think

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> So you think what we have now is the correct behavior: >> >> % git fast-export master ^master >> reset refs/heads/master >> from :0 > > No, I don't think that, either. Well, that's what we have now, and you wa

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Sverre Rabbelier > wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Felipe Contreras >> wrote: >>> Why would it? We are not changing the way objects are exported, the >>> only difference is what happens at t

Re: change symlink

shawn wilson writes: > why is this different? You didn't tell git about t2/one/test. You need to add it first to make it known. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely differe

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > So you think what we have now is the correct behavior: > > % git fast-export master ^master > reset refs/heads/master > from :0 No, I don't think that, either. Hope that helps, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a m

Re: change symlink

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > shawn wilson writes: > >> but should t2 be reported as 'deleted'? > > Sure, that's what you did. > if i do the same to a file (same repo): touch test2 git add test2 git commit test2 -m "test2" rm test ln -s test2 test git status # On b

Re: [PATCH 2/2] completion: simplify __gitcomp test helper

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:27 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:39:01AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> By using print_comp as suggested by SZEDER Gábor. >> >> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras >> --- >> t/t9902-completion.sh | 13 + >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> and in the examples listed in the patch >>> description the changed behavior does not look like an improvement. >> >> I disagree. >> >> % git log mast

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

Felipe Contreras wrote: > % git fast-export $marks_args one > % git fast-export $marks_args one two > > Then yeah, 'one' will be updated once again in the second command, That's probably worth a mention in the commit message and tests (test_expect_failure), to save future readers from some confus

Re: change symlink

shawn wilson writes: > but should t2 be reported as 'deleted'? Sure, that's what you did. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, sch...@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." -- To unsubscribe from this list:

Re: [PATCH] Teach rm to remove submodules when given with a trailing '/'

Am 29.10.2012 08:11, schrieb Johannes Sixt: > Am 10/29/2012 0:28, schrieb Jens Lehmann: >> +/* Remove trailing '/' from directories to find submodules in the index >> */ >> +for (i = 0; i < argc; i++) { >> +size_t pathlen = strlen(argv[i]); >> +if (pathlen && is_dir

Re: [PATCH 2/2] completion: simplify __gitcomp test helper

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 03:39:01AM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote: > By using print_comp as suggested by SZEDER Gábor. > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras > --- > t/t9902-completion.sh | 13 + > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/t/t9902-completion.sh b/

Re: [PATCH 4/5] diff: introduce diff.submoduleFormat configuration variable

Am 29.10.2012 11:30, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > Jens Lehmann wrote: >> Am 02.10.2012 21:44, schrieb Jens Lehmann: >>> Am 02.10.2012 18:51, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: Introduce a diff.submoduleFormat configuration variable corresponding to the '--submodule' command-line option of '

Re: change symlink

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > shawn wilson writes: >> % git status >> # On branch master >> # Changes not staged for commit: >> # (use "git add/rm ..." to update what will be committed) >> # (use "git checkout -- ..." to discard changes in working directory) >> #

Re: change symlink

shawn wilson writes: > i'm curious why this is being reported as deleted in status and diff > and not modified? this was tested on a build of the master branch of > the current git repo (1.8.0). > > mkdir t cd t; git --init > > touch test > git add test > git commit test -m "test" > > ln -s test

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Why would it? We are not changing the way objects are exported, the > only difference is what happens at the end > (handle_tags_and_duplicates()). Because the marking is per-commit, not per-ref, right? Perhaps you could add a simple test

Re: Can't understand the behaviour of git-diff --submodule

Am 28.10.2012 01:02, schrieb Jens Lehmann: > Am 26.10.2012 22:43, schrieb Francis Moreau: >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Jens Lehmann wrote: >> [...] >>> >>> That is weird, "git diff --submodule" should show that too. Is there >>> anything unusual about your setup? (The only explanation I ca

Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper

Hi, On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> But you mentioned something about cooperation, and I've yet to see how >> is it that you are planning to cooperate. If you say you don't have time >> to spend on this, I don't see w

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Hi Felipe, On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:01 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Jonathan Nieder > >> wrote: > > > >>> and in the examples listed in the patch > >>> description the changed behavi

Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper

Hi Felipe, On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Felipe Contreras wrote: > But you mentioned something about cooperation, and I've yet to see how > is it that you are planning to cooperate. If you say you don't have time > to spend on this, I don't see why I should worry about testing this > series of patches. I

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

(again to the mailing list) On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> They have been marked as UNINTERESTING for a reason, lets respect that. That doesn't say anything. > and in the examples listed in the patch > description the changed behavior does

Re: git push tags

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Angelo Borsotti wrote: > Hi Cris, > > I think a key in the config file of the remote repo is better than an > option on git-push for what concerns security: it allows the owner of > the remote repo to enforce the policy not to overwrite tags, which > would not be p

[PATCH v3 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

When an object has already been exported (and thus is in the marks) it is flagged as SHOWN, so it will not be exported again, even if this time it's exported through a different ref. We don't need the object to be exported again, but we want the ref updated, which doesn't happen. Since we can't k

[PATCH v3 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

They have been marked as UNINTERESTING for a reason, lets respect that. Currently the first ref is handled properly, but not the rest, so: % git fast-export master ^master Would currently throw a reset for master (2nd ref), which is not what we want. % git fast-export master ^foo ^bar ^roo %

[PATCH v3 2/4] fast-export: fix comparisson in tests

First the expected, then the actual, otherwise the diff would be the opposite of what we want. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras --- t/t9350-fast-export.sh | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t9350-fast-export.sh b/t/t9350-fast-export.sh index 3e821f9..49bdb

[PATCH v3 1/4] fast-export: trivial cleanup

Setting commit to commit is a no-op. It might have been there to avoid a compiler warning, but if so, it was the compiler to blame. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras --- builtin/fast-export.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/builtin/fast-export.c b/builtin/fast-e

[PATCH v3 0/4] fast-export: general fixes

Hi, Note: sorry for the noise, the first try (v2) was silently eaten by the mailing list handler. First patches are general cleanups and fixes, the last patch fixes a real issue that affects remote helpers. Changes since v2: * Actually send it to the ml Changes since v1: * Improved commit m

Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] fast-export: don't handle uninteresting refs

Felipe Contreras wrote: > They have been marked as UNINTERESTING for a reason, lets respect that. This patch looks unsafe, and in the examples listed in the patch description the changed behavior does not look like an improvement. Worse, the description lists a few examples but gives no convincin

Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] fast-export: fix comparisson in tests

(actually cc-ing the git list this time. Sorry for the noise, all.) Felipe Contreras wrote: > [Subject: [PATCH v2 2/4] fast-export: fix comparisson in tests] > > First the expected, then the actual, otherwise the diff would be the > opposite of what we want. Spelling: s/comparisson/comparison/.

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] fast-export: trivial cleanup

Felipe Contreras wrote: > Setting commit to commit is a no-op. Wrong description. This should say: The code uses the idiom of assigning commit to itself to quench a "may be used uninitialized" warning. Luckily at least modern versions of gcc do not produce that warning

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Felipe Contreras > wrote: >> When an object has already been exported (and thus is in the marks) it >> is flagged as SHOWN, so it will not be exported again, even if this time >> it's exported through a d

Re: [PATCH] parse_dirstat_params(): use string_list to split comma-separated string

Michael Haggerty alum.mit.edu> writes: ... > -static int parse_dirstat_params(struct diff_options *options, const char ... > +static int parse_dirstat_params(struct diff_options *options, const char ... > struct strbuf *errmsg) > { > - const char *p = params; > -

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Chris Webb wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> Yes, it seems this is an API issue; repo.branchtip doesn't exist in >> python 2.2. > > Hi. Presumably this is a problem with old mercurial not a problem with old > python as mentioned in the commit? > >> Both issue

Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] longest_ancestor_length(): require prefix list entries to be normalized

Michael Haggerty wrote: > Move the responsibility for normalizing prefixes from > longest_ancestor_length() to its callers. Use slightly different > normalizations at the two callers: > > In setup_git_directory_gently_1(), use the old normalization, which > ignores paths that are not usable. In t

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

Chris Webb writes: > A common idiom when working with hg bookmarks is to completely ignore the > (not very useful) hg branches (i.e. all commits are on the default hg > branch) and have a bookmark for each line of development used exactly as a > git branch would be. > > On such a repository, at

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] fast-export: make sure refs are updated properly

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > When an object has already been exported (and thus is in the marks) it > is flagged as SHOWN, so it will not be exported again, even if this time > it's exported through a different ref. > > We don't need the object to be exported again,

Re: [PATCH] Enable parallelism in git submodule update.

This is a refresh of a conversation from a couple of months ago. I didn't try to implement all the desired features (e.g., smart logic for passing a -j parameter to recursive submodule invocations), but I did address the one issue that Junio insisted on: the code makes a best effort to detect whet

Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > P.S.: I would still recommend to have a detailed look at the 'devel' > branch, in particular the commits starting with "fast-export: do not refer > to non-existing marks" and ending with "t5801: skip without hg". My > understanding is

[PATCH] Enable parallelism in git submodule update.

The --jobs parameter may be used to set the degree of per-submodule parallel execution. Signed-off-by: Stefan Zager --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt |8 ++- git-submodule.sh| 40 ++- 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-

[PATCH] Enable parallelism in git submodule update.

The --jobs parameter may be used to set the degree of per-submodule parallel execution. Signed-off-by: Stefan Zager --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt |8 ++- git-submodule.sh| 40 ++- 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

Felipe Contreras writes: > Yes, it seems this is an API issue; repo.branchtip doesn't exist in > python 2.2. Hi. Presumably this is a problem with old mercurial not a problem with old python as mentioned in the commit? > Both issues should be fixed now :) They are indeed, and it now works nice

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

Hi Chris, On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Chris Webb wrote: > I routinely work with projects in both hg and git, so I'm really > interested in this. Thanks for working on it! I grabbed the latest > version from > > > https://github.com/felipec/git/blob/fc-remote-hg/contrib/remote-hg/git-remote-hg > > a

Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper

Hi all, On Mon, 29 Oct 2012, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:47:04PM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > >> Yeah, the test script is not ready for merging, it needs to check > > >> for python, hg, and hg-git. > > >> > > >> Do you have hg-git installed? > > > > > > No. But it's imp

Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:02:31PM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> > If remote-hg is going to live in contrib, it probably makes sense to >> > have its tests live there, too, like subtree. >> >> Probably, I'll check that option. >> >> But ev

Re: git push tags

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:23:30PM +0100, Kacper Kornet wrote: > >> > That patch just blocks non-forced updates to refs/tags/. I think a saner >> > start would be to disallow updating non-commit objects without a force. >> > We already do so for

Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] completion: refactor and zsh wrapper

Hi, On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Here's a bit of reorganition. I'm introducing a new __gitcompadd helper that > is > useful to wrapp all changes to COMPREPLY, but first, lets get rid of > unnecessary assignments as SZEDER suggested. > > The zsh wrapper is now very v

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Chris Webb wrote: > Hi. I routinely work with projects in both hg and git, so I'm really > interested in this. Thanks for working on it! I grabbed the latest version > from > > > https://github.com/felipec/git/blob/fc-remote-hg/contrib/remote-hg/git-remote-hg >

Re: [git-users] Git clone fails with "bad pack header", how to get remote log

I tried to install git 1.8 on the remote server and get exactly the same problem :(. Kevin On 10/29/12 6:18 PM, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote: On Mon, 29 Oct 2012 09:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Kevin Molcard wrote: I have a problem with my build system. I have a remote server with a relatively large re

Re: Why does git-commit --template want the template to be modified ?

Hi, On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Tomas Carnecky wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:53:08 +0100, Francis Moreau > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm using git-commit with the --template option. The template I'm >> given is self sufficient for my purpose but as stated in the >> documentation, git-commit w

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2012, #01; Tue, 2)

Sorry for reacting so late, I didn't read the list carefully in the last weeks and my gmail filter somehow didn't trigger on that. On Tuesday 02 October 2012 16:20:22 Junio C Hamano wrote: > * fa/remote-svn (2012-09-19) 16 commits > - Add a test script for remote-svn > - remote-svn: add marks-f

Re: crash on git diff-tree -Ganything for new files with textconv filter

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:46:01PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > (1) sounds attractive for more than one reason. In addition to > avoidance of this issue, it would bring bug-to-bug compatibility > across platforms. Yeah. I mentioned breaking the build for people who would now need to turn on NO_

Re: crash on git diff-tree -Ganything for new files with textconv filter

(1) sounds attractive for more than one reason. In addition to avoidance of this issue, it would bring bug-to-bug compatibility across platforms. (4), if we can run grep on streaming data (tweak interface we have for checking out a large blob to the working tree), would let us work on dataset la

Re: crash on git diff-tree -Ganything for new files with textconv filter

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:47:05PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:35:21PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > > The patch below fixes it, but it's terribly inefficient (it just detects > > the situation and reallocates). It would be much better to disable the > > reuse_worktree_file

Re: Why does git-commit --template want the template to be modified ?

Am 10/30/2012 11:53, schrieb Francis Moreau: > I'm using git-commit with the --template option. The template I'm > given is self sufficient for my purpose but as stated in the > documentation, git-commit wants the template to be edited otherwise it > aborts the operation. > > Is it possible to cha

Re: [PATCH v2] fix 'make test' for HP NonStop

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:21:40AM +0100, Joachim Schmitz wrote: > This fixes the vast majority of test failures on HP NonStop. > Some test don't work with /bin/diff, some fail with /bin/tar, > so let's put /usr/local/bin in PATH first. > Some tests fail with /bin/sh (link to /bin/ksh) so use bas

Re: Why does git-commit --template want the template to be modified ?

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:53:08 +0100, Francis Moreau wrote: > Hi, > > I'm using git-commit with the --template option. The template I'm > given is self sufficient for my purpose but as stated in the > documentation, git-commit wants the template to be edited otherwise it > aborts the operation. >

Why does git-commit --template want the template to be modified ?

Hi, I'm using git-commit with the --template option. The template I'm given is self sufficient for my purpose but as stated in the documentation, git-commit wants the template to be edited otherwise it aborts the operation. Is it possible to change this ? Thanks -- Francis -- To unsubscribe fro

Re: Links broken in ref docs.

Am 30.10.2012 09:07, schrieb Mike Norman: Not seen any recently. I'm guessing the dev is in the path of hurricane Sandy? (Not sarcasm, btw.) Do you still see failures? I checked out the website just now and it seemed to work flawlessly (at least the links I tried, could not find any Sharing o

git-p4 clone @all error

Hi, (I am a French student, sorry for my English.) So, i want import my perforce projet on my server git. perforce my project tree : depot dev_data mainline release_1.0 release_1.0.0 my command is : git-p4 clone -v --detect-branches //depot@all /home/user/projets/deport The problem :

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

Chris Webb writes: > The first is really a symptom of a general difference between hg and git: an > hg > repository can have multiple heads, whereas a git repo has exactly one head. By this I mean an hg repository without bookmarks or branches can still have multiple heads, whereas a git branch

Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] New remote-hg helper

Hi. I routinely work with projects in both hg and git, so I'm really interested in this. Thanks for working on it! I grabbed the latest version from https://github.com/felipec/git/blob/fc-remote-hg/contrib/remote-hg/git-remote-hg and have been trying it out. For the most part, it seems to work

Re: [PATCH] update-index/diff-index: use core.preloadindex to improve performance

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:50 AM, wrote: > 'update-index --refresh' and 'diff-index' (without --cached) don't honor > the core.preloadindex setting yet. Porcelain commands using these (such as > git [svn] rebase) suffer from this, especially on Windows. > > Use read_cache_preload to improve perfo

[PATCH] update-index/diff-index: use core.preloadindex to improve performance

'update-index --refresh' and 'diff-index' (without --cached) don't honor the core.preloadindex setting yet. Porcelain commands using these (such as git [svn] rebase) suffer from this, especially on Windows. Use read_cache_preload to improve performance. Additionally, in builtin/diff.c, don't prel

  1   2   >