[git-users] merge.renamelimit?

[Leam Hall]

Before I go off and make changes, can you help me understand this warning? 
I get the concept, but haven't seen this one before.

warning: inexact rename detection was skipped due to too many files. 
warning: you may want to set your merge.renamelimit variable to at least 
1232 and retry the command. Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then 
commit the result.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/git-users/ecfe3f59-b11a-49d6-b077-f90f48680fc8n%40googlegroups.com.

Re: [git-users] Way to mark files as not a merge conflict?

[Leam Hall]

I'm working through Constantine's suggestions today. So far the 
.gitignore doesn't work, since the files need to be in the repository. 
Also, since most of them are in their own directory, even the directory 
wouldn't be a part of the repository. They are text files, not binary, 
if that makes a difference.


"git checkout" won't really work as it requires us to manually get zero 
to four files for an automated process. Some times one or two of the 
files might change, sometimes all of them do.


Looking at "git merge --strategy=ours" next. Not sure how that will 
handle files that should be changed, or marked as conflicting.


There my not be a technical solution, and we may have to change our 
process. We'll see how things go.


Still working on it.

Leam



On 8/20/20 2:32 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:

Also, you may need to set the files (file types) to be marked as binary, so
that textural merge is not used.

The line by line textural merge can cause confusion for the --ours because
it may be that un-conflicted changes are merged anyway, and it is only in
the case of *conflict *that --ours is used. i.e. read the manual very
carefully - is obvious in hindsight, as it always is ;-)  [is it a conflict
resolution strategy, or is it a method of 'merging']

--
Philip
On Wednesday, August 19, 2020 at 8:32:40 PM UTC+1 constantin...@gmail.com
wrote:


Options:
1. Add such files to .gitignore
2. git checkout  ...
3. git merge --strategy=ours ...

Regards

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 10:00 PM Leam Hall  wrote:


Hopefully I can explain this well...

We have some files that are generated as a part of the build process. So
they can get updated frequently during some coding events. They must be in
the repo since other tools use these specific files, but do not run the
build process. However, if there is a push to the master repo, a merge
conflict isn't really an issue, since the files will get regenerated during
build.

Is there a way to mark files as "Keep in the repo, use the current copy,
and don't worry about merge-conflicts"?

Thanks!

Leam

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Git for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to git-users+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/git-users/a117a00c-824b-4b1b-b617-84d995d69254o%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/git-users/a117a00c-824b-4b1b-b617-84d995d69254o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email_source=footer>
.




--
Constantine Shulyupin





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for 
human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/git-users/ea72257a-9c40-560e-e307-4a091234767d%40gmail.com.

[git-users] Way to mark files as not a merge conflict?

[Leam Hall]

Hopefully I can explain this well...

We have some files that are generated as a part of the build process. So 
they can get updated frequently during some coding events. They must be in 
the repo since other tools use these specific files, but do not run the 
build process. However, if there is a push to the master repo, a merge 
conflict isn't really an issue, since the files will get regenerated during 
build. 

Is there a way to mark files as "Keep in the repo, use the current copy, 
and don't worry about merge-conflicts"?

Thanks!

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/git-users/a117a00c-824b-4b1b-b617-84d995d69254o%40googlegroups.com.

[git-users] Trying to keep two projects together

[leam hall]

Project A has config files and other stuff. Project B is a superset of 
Project A, it includes everything in A plus more. We often need to update a 
file in A and deploy the new stuff. However, any server that currently gets 
A should get nothing of B. However, a server getting the updated B files 
should get the most recently changed A files.

Whew, hope that's not too confusing. The question is, are tags the way to 
go or is there a better way?

Thanks!

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [git-users] How do you find the latest "revision" of agit repo branch?

[Leam Hall]

Also, a free on-line book:   https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2

On 02/10/16 18:37, Suu wrote:

Before I build/compile a git branch, I would like to know whether it has
changed since the last time I built it.
If no change, I won't bother to build.

in Subversion, it's a "revision number" that identifies the whole set of
source code at the time. If you commit another set of changes to the
branch, you get a new "revision number"

What is its equivalent in GIT? (commit SHA-1 number?)

How do I get that value? (git log -p 1?)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Git for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for 
human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [git-users] Building GIT: how to get the set of source code on a branch in order to build it?

[Leam Hall]

Your gut is correct.  :)

On 02/10/16 18:47, Suu Quan wrote:

Thanks Leam

Follow up.

Case 2:  already exists from a previous clone.

Question: is it more efficient to

1.Do what Leam just said: “cd ; git pull”

or

2.Rm –rf 
git clone 

??

(gut feeling it’s #1 that is more efficient)

-Original Message-
From: Leam Hall [mailto:leamh...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 3:35 PM
To: git-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [git-users] Building GIT: how to get the set of source code
on a branch in order to build it?

Case 1:

   git clone 

Case 2:

   cd 

   git pull

Welcome to git!

On 02/10/16 18:33, Suu wrote:

 > my interest is in creating scripts to build software stored in GIT

 > repos. (I am a build engineer) Brand new to GIT, actually never used

 > it, but now i have to build it.

 >

 > I just want to 'get' the latest revision of the source code on a

 > branch (or master depending on the case), change dir to it, and start

 > make/ant/mvn ..., If there are several choices, I am looking for the

 > most efficient one.

 >

 > Case 1: I am on a machine with NO git repository at all (first time

 > building that product, or the copy of the repository has been purged).

 > How do I get the source code over?  "git clone"?

 >

 > Case 2: I've got a copy of the repository, from the last time (already

 > built at least once, and the directory has not been purged), How do I

 > update the source code to be the latest on that branch?

 > 'git pull' ? 'git fetch' ?

 > Is it better/more efficient to purge the old code and start from scratch?

 >

 > Thanks in advance

 >

 > If that helps, I'm mostly on Linux or Unix

 >

 > --

 > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

 > Groups "Git for human beings" group.

 > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send

 > an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>

 > <mailto:git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.

 > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
Google Groups "Git for human beings" group.

To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/git-users/OKAbS8iXvxs/unsubscribe.

To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Git for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for 
human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [git-users] How do you find the latest "revision" of agit repo branch?

[Leam Hall]

Hmm...depends. Yes, the git hash will be the same if you're on the same 
version. How manual do you want it to be? "git status" will show you the 
status but isn't manual.


You can "git log | head -1' for the commit hash, if that's what you 
want. For example:


git log | head -1
commit bfbe91980accf14820fddf1167351fd6dffc6a14



On 02/10/16 18:37, Suu wrote:

Before I build/compile a git branch, I would like to know whether it has
changed since the last time I built it.
If no change, I won't bother to build.

in Subversion, it's a "revision number" that identifies the whole set of
source code at the time. If you commit another set of changes to the
branch, you get a new "revision number"

What is its equivalent in GIT? (commit SHA-1 number?)

How do I get that value? (git log -p 1?)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Git for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for 
human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] How does another user follow the current branch?

[leam hall]

Hey y'all, 

I'm not complaining about the magic, but would like to understand. If user 
C is coding on a git branch and user R goes into that code's directory, 
then R will see whatever files are in the current branch. If C changes 
branches, R's view will also change. How does that happen?

Thanks!

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [git-users] Is there a way to supress login banners on git pull?

[leam hall]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Martin Møller Skarbiniks Pedersen 
traxpla...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 12 August 2015 at 16:05, leam hall leamh...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 12:52:24 AM UTC-4, GadgetSteve wrote:


 On 11/08/2015 15:41, leam hall wrote:
  Is there a way to suppress the normal ssh banner when doing a git
 pull?
  Something equivalent to ssh -q? If I missed a README, please point
 me
  in that direction.
 
  Thanks!
 
  Leam
 



 Two options:

 1. Add to your ~/.ssh/config
 Host your-host
 LogLevel QUIET


Martin, YOU ARE AWESOME!

Thanks!

Leam

-- 
Mind on a Mission http://leamhall.blogspot.com/

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [git-users] Is there a way to supress login banners on git pull?

[leam hall]

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 12:52:24 AM UTC-4, GadgetSteve wrote:


 On 11/08/2015 15:41, leam hall wrote: 
  Is there a way to suppress the normal ssh banner when doing a git pull? 
  Something equivalent to ssh -q? If I missed a README, please point me 
  in that direction. 
  
  Thanks! 
  
  Leam 
  

 Leam, 

 Would git pull -q be what you are looking for? 

 Gadget/Steve 



So far it's not working, I'm still seeing the /etc/issue file. 

Leam 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] Is there a way to supress login banners on git pull?

[leam hall]

Is there a way to suppress the normal ssh banner when doing a git pull? 
Something equivalent to ssh -q? If I missed a README, please point me in 
that direction.

Thanks!

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] Dozens of branches a good idea?

[leam hall]

Working on a project that's importing code from an older project. There are 
2-3 dozen small bits and we're trying to add some functionality and clean 
up the code in each small bit. Would it make sense to make each small bit 
it's own branch? The theory is that as each branch becomes workable it gets 
merged into master. That way no user pulls code that doesn't work and gets 
a bad impression of the project. 

Thoughts?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] Hook for controlling owner, group, and permissions?

[leam hall]

Hey all, I'm still learning.

Is there a HOWTO or tutorial for how to control owner, group, and 
permissions on files as they get checked in? The ideal is that the owner 
and group change to X and Y and the permissions are set to 770. I'd 
like to figure out how to do and test that. 

Thoughts?

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] Re: Hook for controlling owner, group, and permissions?

[leam hall]

On Tuesday, December 9, 2014 1:32:28 PM UTC-5, leam hall wrote:

 Hey all, I'm still learning.

 Is there a HOWTO or tutorial for how to control owner, group, and 
 permissions on files as they get checked in? The ideal is that the owner 
 and group change to X and Y and the permissions are set to 770. I'd 
 like to figure out how to do and test that. 

 Thoughts?

 Leam


Hmm..Not sure this would work in git, though. The idea is that before the 
code is deployed it would get permissions and whatnot fixed.   

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[git-users] Workflow from personal to local to remote?

[leam hall]

I'm trying to design a workflow for our team and could use some advice. My 
git-fu is young. 

We have  a remote repo that will store the authoritative code. That will be 
pulled to a server local repo where the team has access. Each person will 
clone the local repo into their home directory, edit files, and then push 
to the local repo. Somehow we will trigger code review and acks, and then 
someone will push from the local repo to the authoritative repo. 

What I need help understanding is:

1. How to prevent code being pushed from local repo to authoritative until 
it is reviewed? Is this a process issue or does git have a way to enforce 
it?

2. For the few of us who can push from local to authoritative, how do I 
configure my .gitconfig to normally push to the local repo? My code should 
be reviewed, just like everyone else's. 

Thoughts? Pointers to documentation is fine, I just don't know what to look 
for.

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

[git-users] Branch of branches?

[leam hall]

Okay, newbie question. Organization Foo has developers Sam, Fred, and 
Guido. The org clones Project X and over time realizes their own branch 
needs to be separate from the project for a while. Sam, Fred, and Guido 
each branch their code for the parts of the project they are working on. 

When Foo decides X-Foo is ready to merge with the master, can the three 
developers merge their changes into Foo's branch, and then merge the 
corporate branch into the project? Assuming everyone is willing, of course.

Leam

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.