Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
the main repository? Is that possible? (My tree is currently in that
state; it is one commit ahead of plt/master but that commit message is
a lie-- I've just sta
Can I do that once I've pushed to robby/plt? What happens to other
machines that have unsquashed versions of those commits?
Robby
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> I like to do an interactive rebase and squash commits together:
>
> git rebase -i HEAD^^10
>
> where 10 is how m
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
> moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
> the main repository? Is that possible? (My tree is currently in that
> state; it is one commit ahead
That's what the force option for a rebasing fetch is for, to accept
overwriting the history on the machine. [For example, on Matthew's gr2
branch, he would regularly do this.]
Jay
2011/1/7 Robby Findler :
> Can I do that once I've pushed to robby/plt? What happens to other
> machines that have un
1. Is there a struct/contract?
2. I would like to write something like this:
(define-struct/contract foo ([bar number?][moo (->i (*bar*) ([x (and/c number?
(>/c bar))]) (r number?))]) #:mutable)
The *bar* is a 'reference' to the bar field, that is, I want to have a function
contract for a s
I like to do an interactive rebase and squash commits together:
git rebase -i HEAD^^10
where 10 is how many commits ahead of the master I am
Jay
2011/1/7 Robby Findler :
> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
> moving to another machine and I don't want that comm
I think what I get from you and Jay is that it is possible to do, but
I guess I'm not completely clear on one particular usecase how it
would play out. (I understand that history rewriting is not allowed on
plt/master and that makes a lot of sense, etc.)
Lets say that, on my laptop I make 7 commit
I think that chaperones let us implement this contract, but I don't
think that you can actually do it yet in the contract library (because
of the dependency), but Stevie would know best.
Robby
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> 1. Is there a struct/contract?
>
> 2. I w
Okay, I tried an example of this and I'm getting stuck. I did one
commit and pushed on my laptop. On the desktop, I did another commit
and then I used an interactive rebase to swap the order of the
commits. Then, I did a push --force, which I think I understand and I
think worked.
Then, on the lap
My answers are:
1. There isn't, but I've been planning to do this as soon as I revisit
define-struct/contract in the new chaperone/impersonator world.
2. It's doable, but hasn't been done yet. I'll try and keep this in mind when
I revisit the things listed in 1. If I were to do it, I'd imagin
On Jan 7, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> Then, on the laptop, I did a git pull, and I ended up with the commits
> back in the original order and a merge commit afterwards but I would
> rather just have my state be like the server's was.
Then don't do git pull. That not only updates you
On Jan 7, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Stevie Strickland wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
>> Then, on the laptop, I did a git pull, and I ended up with the commits
>> back in the original order and a merge commit afterwards but I would
>> rather just have my state be like the server
On Jan 7, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
> moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
> the main repository? Is that possible? (My tree is currently in that
> state; it is one commit ahead of
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:39 PM, John Clements wrote:
>
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>
>> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
>> moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
>> the main repository? Is that possible? (My
At Fri, 7 Jan 2011 11:39:33 -0800,
John Clements wrote:
> Taking a step back: is there really anything wrong with such commits? Given
> that drdr and e-mail alerts are based on pushes rather than commits, it seems
> not unreasonable to just let those be intermediate commits. I can see that
>
Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they use
"subprocess" with (current-output-port), which (in DrRacket) is not a
file-stream port.
In DrRacket's interactions window:
> (file-stream-port? (current-output-port))
#f
Is this expected, or should DrRacket's current-outp
[Pre-apologies for sending multiple messages, this thread is way too
big to combine replies.]
Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
> Thanks, Carl. I have tried that route in the past and I found that I
> let robby/plt get too far out of sync with the tree. So I'm looking
> for a workflow where, perhaps
Yesterday, Carl Eastlund wrote:
>
> First do a "git fetch " for that remote, or just "git
> remote update" which fetches from all your remotes. Then "git reset
> --hard /master" will clobber whatever you have and
> replace it with the remote's master branch.
Note that this changes the current br
Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
>
> So I did this ("git" means "git.racket-lang.org" in my ssh setup as
> I did things that way before Eli's recommendation changed)
>
> git clone git:robby/plt
> git remote add plt git:plt
It might be more convenient to flip it -- clone git:plt first, and
the
On Jan 7, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
>>
>> So I did this ("git" means "git.racket-lang.org" in my ssh setup as
>> I did things that way before Eli's recommendation changed)
>>
>> git clone git:robby/plt
>> git remote add plt git:plt
>
> It might be
(Ping for Mike)
Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
> that is off on its own side path. Ie my graph looks like this:
>
>o improve canvas drawing docs
>|
>o Merge remote branch origin (committer Sperber)
> /|
> / |
> | o
> | |
> | 73 commits (why 73?!)
> | |
> | o like f57b431c2e
5 minutes ago, Stevie Strickland wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
> >>
> >> So I did this ("git" means "git.racket-lang.org" in my ssh setup as
> >> I did things that way before Eli's recommendation changed)
> >>
> >> git clone git:robb
Yesterday, Carl Eastlund wrote:
>
> What you want to do is run gitk and/or git log on origin/master,
> which is where those 53 show up.
A useful bit here -- you can pass `--all' to gitk which will make it
show all branches and tags.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))
5 hours ago, Robby Findler wrote:
> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
> moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
> the main repository? Is that possible? (My tree is currently in that
> state; it is one commit ahead of plt/master but th
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> 5 minutes ago, Stevie Strickland wrote:
>> On Jan 7, 2011, at 3:43 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>> > Yesterday, Robby Findler wrote:
>> >>
>> >> So I did this ("git" means "git.racket-lang.org" in my ssh setup as
>> >> I did things that way before E
Four hours ago, Stevie Strickland wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> > Then, on the laptop, I did a git pull, and I ended up with the
> > commits back in the original order and a merge commit afterwards
> > but I would rather just have my state be like the server's was.
>
Four hours ago, Stevie Strickland wrote:
> In general, this is why people say you really shouldn't train
> yourself to do "git pull" automatically, because there's plenty of
> places where you don't want that. I always do "git remote
> update"/"git merge ..." separately because there's plenty of t
I don't think it is possible with our current port support to make a
port that goes into a text% and returns #t to that predicate (is it?).
Robby
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:36 PM, John Clements wrote:
> Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they use
> "subprocess" with (
Two hours ago, John Clements wrote:
>
> Taking a step back: is there really anything wrong with such
> commits?
What Robby and Vincent generalizes too -- merging can be confusing
sometimes, either to the author or to the others; and there are a
bunch of tools that become less useful if the histor
On Jan 7, 2011, at 1:47 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> I don't think it is possible with our current port support to make a
> port that goes into a text% and returns #t to that predicate (is it?).
In that case, I'll edit the docs to reflect this.
John
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic
An hour and a half ago, John Clements wrote:
> Currently, you can't run the mongodb tests in DrRacket, because they
> use "subprocess" with (current-output-port), which (in DrRacket) is
> not a file-stream port.
So they should switch to `process' which does the necessary gluing.
(One thing I don'
I'm surprised no one has linked this all-clarifying blog post :)
http://tartley.com/?p=1267
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Two hours ago, John Clements wrote:
>>
>> Taking a step back: is there really anything wrong with such
>> commits?
>
> What Robby and Vincent gener
I've recently prepared an extension to the contract system based on
some work that Cormac Flanagan and I did.
The code is available at:
https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/tree/master/temporal-ctcs
The documentation is available at:
http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay/tmp/20110107-tempc/t
33 matches
Mail list logo
