In this patch, foreach --recursive acts depth-first, much like the default
behavior described in the patch by Imram Yousuf in this
post http://marc.info/?l=gitm=121066084508631w=2.
Changes were made so that the submodule Entering ... message was right
next to the output generated by the command
Sent from my iPad Roselle Lee Valentino
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr writes:
A few more random thoughts (not on my personal todo-list):
One more:
When sending commit emails, it may help to ensure that the dates are
strictly monotonic, so that the thread is seen in the right order.
IIRC, git send-email does this by
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes:
Test with patchbefore
4000.2: log --raw -3000 0.50(0.43+0.06) 0.54(0.46+0.06) +7.0%***
4000.3: log -p
Hi,
snip
perhaps you should give Perfoce's git-bridge a try.
cu
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards
Enrico Weigelt
VNC - Virtual Network Consult GmbH
Head Of Development
Pariser Platz 4a, D-10117 Berlin
Tel.: +49 (30) 3464615-20
Mobile: +49 (151) 27565287
Fax: +49 (30) 3464615-59
If project or directory belongs to more than one GIT_DIR then some of
the GIT_DIR's may need a different .gitignore files, it would be
useful if one could define it independently, e.g. in GIT_DIR/config:
[core]
ignorefilename = .gitalternateignore
Has anyone considered making the .gitignore
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
When a remote ref or a tag is checked out, HEAD is automatically
detached. There is no user friendly way to find out what ref is
checked out in this case. This patch digs in reflog for this
information and shows Detached
Jari Pennanen jari.penna...@gmail.com writes:
If project or directory belongs to more than one GIT_DIR then some of
the GIT_DIR's may need a different .gitignore files, it would be
useful if one could define it independently, e.g. in GIT_DIR/config:
[core]
ignorefilename =
2013/3/4 Matthieu Moy matthieu@grenoble-inp.fr:
There is already core.excludesfile, which does not replace the usual
.gitignore but comes in addition. The common use is a user-wide ignore
file, not a per-directory one.
I'm actually aware of that. Problem is the normal .gitignore files
must
Duy Nguyen pclo...@gmail.com writes:
Instead of punting to Currently not on any branch, would it help
to show the place you first detached at, so that the user can then
grab that commit object name and run
$ git log --oneline $that_commit..
or something?
$that_commit would be
That should be reviewed carefully as I'm not exactly sure that does make
sense with the way combined-diff works.
Still it seems natural to me to be able to remove the space in combined
diff as we do with normal diff. Especially as I unfortunately have to
deal with many space + feature merges
Hello all:
This is my first time posting to this mailing list, but it appears to
me, through a Google search, that this is where you go to report what
might be bugs. I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but it is
mysterious to me.
My git repository has this directory structure (I don't know if
Antoine Pelisse apeli...@gmail.com writes:
It feels incorrect to me to coalsesce - 5 and - 5 as it might
look incorrect to the user. But still the idea is appealing.
The users already need to see that when reading a regular patch with
one or more context lines and -b/-w/etc., anyway. The
On 02/11/13 20:27, Stephen Boyd wrote:
I ran into these bugs the other day and didn't have time to
investigate further. So I wrote test cases for them instead.
Stephen Boyd (2):
t3501: Expose bug with cherry-pick into dirty trees w/ renames
t3501: Expose addinfo_cache error message in
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Antoine Pelisse apeli...@gmail.com writes:
It feels incorrect to me to coalsesce - 5 and - 5 as it might
look incorrect to the user. But still the idea is appealing.
The users already need to see that when reading a
(git version 1.7.7.6)
I've been learning how to use Git. While exploring git rebase, I've
discovered that if the branch being rebased contains an evil merge,
that is, a merge which contains changes that are in addition to the
changes in any of the parent commits, the rebase operation will
Robert Irelan rire...@epic.com writes:
Now, when I run 'git add admin_script/setup' to add the new directory to
the repo and then try to commit, I receive the following message:
$ git commit
mv: cannot stat `admin_scripts/setup/2012/setup': No such file or
directory
The error
With git submodule init the user is able to tell git he cares about one
or more submodules and wants to have it populated on the next call to git
submodule update. But currently there is no easy way he could tell git he
does not care about a submodule anymore and wants to get rid of his local
work
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) writes:
(git version 1.7.7.6)
I've been learning how to use Git. While exploring git rebase, I've
discovered that if the branch being rebased contains an evil merge,
that is, a merge which contains changes that
Thomas Rast tr...@student.ethz.ch writes:
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley) writes:
(git version 1.7.7.6)
I've been learning how to use Git. While exploring git rebase, I've
discovered that if the branch being rebased contains an evil merge,
Please don't attach your patches, see Documentation/SubmittingPatches on
how to post patches to this list.
Am 04.03.2013 09:41, schrieb Eric Cousineau:
In this patch, foreach --recursive acts depth-first, much like the default
behavior described in the patch by Imram Yousuf in this
post
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Paul Campbell pcampb...@kemitix.net wrote:
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 11:21 AM, David Michael Barr b...@rr-dav.id.au wrote:
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Paul Campbell pcampb...@kemitix.net wrote:
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Kindjal kind...@gmail.com wrote:
In ancient times, we used to disallow the same source ref to be
pushed to more than one places, e.g. git push there master:master
master:naster was disallowed. We later lifted this restriction
with db27ee63929f (send-pack: allow the same source to be pushed
more than once., 2005-08-06) and there
From: Gene Thomas [DATACOM] gene.tho...@datacom.co.nz
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 11:06 PM
Hello,
I am evaluating git for use in a company. Please correct if I am wrong.
I am concerned that an inexperienced developer could mistakenly rebase
branches, destroying the original branch.
The
What is the best way to host a shared git repo on a Windows 2008 box? I
would like to create a repo on the 2008 box (that everyone will
pull/push to), but add the initial code from my developer (Windows7 box).
J.V.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body
Similar to in_merge_bases(commit, other) that returns true when
commit is an ancestor (i.e. in the merge bases between the two) of
the other commit, in_merge_bases_many(commit, n_other, other[])
checks if commit is an ancestor of any of the other[] commits.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
The new option --follow-tag tells git push to push tags that are
missing from the other side and that can be reached by the history
that is otherwise pushed out. For example, if you are using the
simple, current, or upstream push, you would ordinarily push
the history leading to the commit at
Philip,
Thanks for your reply.
The original branch is not 'destroyed', rather the pointer to the previous tip
is within the logs.
Is that the 'git log' log or internal logs? Are you sure? There doesn't appear
to be a way to checkout that tip of see the log back from that tip.
All the
Hi,
I have just had the attached bash session, and I have no idea on what
is going on.
Any help appreciated,
Javier Domingo
bug
Description: Binary data
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:05:32PM +1300, Gene Thomas [DATACOM] wrote:
The original branch is not 'destroyed', rather the pointer to the previous
tip is within the logs.
Is that the 'git log' log or internal logs? Are you sure? There doesn't
appear to be a way to checkout that tip of
binj2ENTGYfsu.bin
Description: iso-8859-1
Hi,
Leaders of Git language teams please note that a new git.pot is
generated from v1.8.2-rc2-4-g77995 in the master branch. See
commit:
l10n: git.pot: v1.8.2 round 4 (1 changed)
Generate po/git.pot from v1.8.2-rc2-4-g77995 for git v1.8.2
l10n round 4.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin
Javier Domingo javier...@gmail.com writes:
I have just had the attached bash session, and I have no idea on what
is going on.
Any help appreciated,
Javier Domingo
javier@frodo:~/proyectos/pfc$ git push -vvv javier master
Pushing to git@server:javier/pfc
To git@server:javier/pfc
!
git-submodule.sh: In foreach, make '-post-order' yield post-order
traversal and
'--include-super' execute commands at the top-level supermodule, with
both of these
options compatible with '--recursive'.
Signed-off-by: Eric Cousineau eacousin...@gmail.com
---
Sorry about missing the part about
Translate 1 new message came from git.pot update in
ed1ddaf (l10n: git.pot: v1.8.2 round 4 (1 changed)).
Signed-off-by: Ralf Thielow ralf.thie...@gmail.com
---
po/de.po | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/po/de.po b/po/de.po
index 37aa24d..83c30b1 100644
---
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 02:36:33PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
In ancient times, we used to disallow the same source ref to be
pushed to more than one places, e.g. git push there master:master
master:naster was disallowed. We later lifted this restriction
with db27ee63929f (send-pack: allow
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 10:20:24PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
index 004c034..44f70c4 100755
--- a/git-submodule.sh
+++ b/git-submodule.sh
@@ -547,6 +548,80 @@ cmd_init()
}
[...]
+
+ module_list $@ |
+ while read mode sha1
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 03:00:45PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
So if you want a single boolean to toggle between the current
behaviour and the other one, it would be --post-order. But you may
at least want to consider pros and cons of allowing users to give
two separate commands, one for the
38 matches
Mail list logo
