Re: RFC v3: Another proposed hash function transition plan

Hi Brandon, On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Brandon Williams wrote: > On 09/08, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > > > One thing I still do not know how I feel about after re-reading the > > > thread, and I didn't find the above doc, is Linus's suggestion to > > >

Bug: git branch --unset-upstream command can nuke config when disk is full.

After being away for a while I saw the following message in one of my git repos: $ git status On branch yves/xxx Your branch is based on 'origin/yves/xxx', but the upstream is gone. (use "git branch --unset-upstream" to fixup) nothing to commit, working tree clean $ git branch --unset-upstream

Re: [idea] File history tracking hints

Hi Philip, On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Philip Oakley wrote: > From: "Pavel Kretov" > > Hi all, > > > > Excuse me if the topic I'm going to raise here has been already discussed > > on the mailing list, forums, or IRC, but I couldn't find anything related. > > > > > > The

Re: [PATCH] commit-template: change a message to be more intuitive

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 12:29:15PM +0200, Kevin Daudt wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 04:25:36PM +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > > It's not possible to 'touch' the cut-line that is shown when the > > user requests a patch in his commit template. > > > > Touching something can also mean to

Re: [PATCH 3/4] replace-objects: evaluate replacement refs without using the object store

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:03:58AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > On 09/12/2017 07:31 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > From: Stefan Beller > > > > Pass DO_FOR_EACH_INCLUDE_BROKEN when iterating over replacement refs > > so that the iteration does not require opening the

Re: BUG: attempt to trim too many characters

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 09:29:49PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Just reminding people that this issue would seem to still exist in > current master.. Yeah, the fix is in 1d0538e4860, but it's still working it's way up through the integration branches. -Peff

Re: [PATCH] commit-template: change a message to be more intuitive

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 04:25:36PM +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > It's not possible to 'touch' the cut-line that is shown when the > user requests a patch in his commit template. > Touching something can also mean to disturb or change something, which is the meaning being used here, so it is

BUSINESS PROPOSAL

Please I like you to keep this proposal as a top secret and delete it if you are not interested and get back to me if you are interested for details as regards to the transfer of $24,500,000 to you. This money initially belongs to a Libyan client who died in the libya crisis and had no

Re: Unexpected pass for t6120-describe.sh on cygwin

Johannes Schindelin venit, vidit, dixit 12.09.2017 15:39: > Hi Ramsay, > > On Sat, 9 Sep 2017, Ramsay Jones wrote: > >> I ran the test-suite on the 'pu' branch last night (simply because that >> was what I had built at the time!), which resulted in a PASS, but t6120 >> was showing a 'TODO

Re: Buffered value should be shown when requesting username for remote authentication

On Tuesday 12 September 2017 09:03 PM, Jeff King wrote: If I understand right, you typed "sivaraam" once, then the network lagged, then you typed "sivaraam" again. Almost there but I should have been more clearer. What I actually did was I run `git push` and knowing it would ask for a username

Re: [PATCH 4/4] packed refs: pass .git dir instead of packed-refs path to init_fn

On 09/12/2017 07:32 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > From: Stefan Beller > > The first argument of a ref_store_init_fn is documented to represent > the $GIT_DIR, not the path to the packed-refs file. This brings the > packed-refs store more in line with the usual ref store

Re: [PATCH 3/4] replace-objects: evaluate replacement refs without using the object store

On 09/12/2017 07:31 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > From: Stefan Beller > > Pass DO_FOR_EACH_INCLUDE_BROKEN when iterating over replacement refs > so that the iteration does not require opening the named objects from > the object store. This avoids a dependency cycle between

Re: [PATCH 10/10] add UNLEAK annotation for reducing leak false positives

On Tuesday 12 September 2017 08:35 PM, Jeff King wrote: But theta-well isn't a pun. :P :) It is true that prepending to a linked list is also Θ(1), but I'm not sure if it's carelessness that causes many programmers to use big-O. It's that what we care about is worst-case performance. So

Re: [PATCH 10/10] add UNLEAK annotation for reducing leak false positives

On Tuesday 12 September 2017 08:59 PM, Jeff King wrote: Like all good writing rules, I think it's important to know when to break them. :) That's right. "Have guidelines but 'Be bold' enough to break them when they seem to be inducing counter productivity." Writing in the imperative is

<    1   2