On 11/12/2016 11:02 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2016-11-09 20:07, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Although I have my doubts it would explain all the issues I've hit upon
with git's CLI. For example: I don't see why annotated tags aren't the
default. Or why non-annotated ones even exist at all. When I
On 2016-11-10 06:31, Dicebot wrote:
I think it is related, but is not necessary consequence. My
understanding is that for a long time command line design was given zero
thoughts on its own - it was directly exposing whatever git does
internally with no usability considerations. Which is why it
On 2016-11-09 20:07, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Although I have my doubts it would explain all the issues I've hit upon
with git's CLI. For example: I don't see why annotated tags aren't the
default. Or why non-annotated ones even exist at all. When I made
On 11/10/2016 09:31 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On 11/10/2016 06:07 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Its things like that. I'd be surprised if that has much to do with git's
nature as a "dumb" DAG tool. It's just the general good-design principle
of "The thing you *want to* or *should* do or *expect* 99% of
On 11/10/2016 06:07 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On 11/08/2016 02:11 PM, Antonio Corbi wrote:
>>
>> Maybe this one is useful for you:
>>
>> http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/
> On 11/08/2016 03:01 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Nothing immediately comes to mind,
On 11/09/2016 11:27 PM, Stefan Koch wrote:
Please cut down on the OT guys.
This thread serves as my development log :)
As well as providing a place for discussion of the new engine.
Though that discussion seems to be very quiet at the moment.
Although the default web-based front-end for this
On Thursday, 10 November 2016 at 04:22:10 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
On 11/08/2016 11:40 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:44:50 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I really wish Google would take that to heart. They seem to
make a habit
of ripping things out *before* having
On 11/08/2016 11:40 PM, Chris Wright wrote:
On Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:44:50 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
I really wish Google would take that to heart. They seem to make a habit
of ripping things out *before* having replacements in place.
I think they just simply love deleting code.
I've seen
On 11/08/2016 02:11 PM, Antonio Corbi wrote:
>
> Maybe this one is useful for you:
>
> http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/
On 11/08/2016 03:01 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Nothing immediately comes to mind, but thanks to Dr. Google, I found
this page that's sorta
On Tue, 08 Nov 2016 11:44:50 -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I really wish Google would take that to heart. They seem to make a habit
> of ripping things out *before* having replacements in place.
>
> I think they just simply love deleting code.
I've seen this more internally than externally.
On 11/05/2016 04:57 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
That's good thinking - leave short term to the short term and long term
to the long term. As the Romanian proverb goes: "Don't sell the skin of
the bear before you shoot it." -- Andrei
I really wish Google would take that to heart. They seem
11 matches
Mail list logo
