4PM +0200, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 14:57 -0500, Elliott Cable wrote:
>> > > Presumably this isn't intended behaviour?
>> >
>> > It actually is. git-submodule sets GIT_PROTOCOL_FROM_USER to 0, which
>> > makes git
Set up `persistent-https` as described in the [README][]; including the
‘rewrite https urls’ feature in `.gitconfig`:
[url "persistent-https"]
insteadof = https
[url "persistent-http"]
insteadof = http
Unfortunately, this breaks `git submodule add`:
> git submodule
oh, wow, this got over my head *real* fast. Okay,
1. Yeah, my `$GIT_WORK_TREE` was def. an absolute path; I typed that
example code without running it *precisely* that way (entirely my
mistake! I'm so sorry for the confusion it caused, and all that typing
you did!); if I remember correctly (not
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Elliott Cable <m...@ell.io> wrote:
> So, I find this behaviour a little strange; I can't determine if it's
> a subtle bug, or intentionally undefined/‘fuzzy’ behaviour ...
Oh lord, it gets worse ...
$ cd a-repo
$ git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree; g
So, I find this behaviour a little strange; I can't determine if it's
a subtle bug, or intentionally undefined/‘fuzzy’ behaviour:
$ cd a-repo/.git/
$ pwd
/path/to/a-repo/.git
$ git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree
false
$ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/path/to/a-repo
$ git
So, `git help rev-parse` [mentions the following][rev-parse], as of
2.8.0:
--git-dir
Show $GIT_DIR if defined. Otherwise show the path to the .git
directory. The path shown, when relative, is relative to the
current working directory.
However, when inside a symlinked
I'm not sure what version the `%>` / `<|` / etc padding showed up in,
but they're truly excellent for building beautiful one-line `git log`
output.
This may be a long-shot, but, unfortunately, these new formats sort of
fall flat in the presence of `git log --graph`: The ‘pad until column’
So, I've spent some time in the #git channel on Freenode chatting
about this, and we couldn't figure it out. I can't reproduce it in a
newly-made repository, but it's reproducible with the repository I've
been working in.
git status
On branch Master
Your branch is ahead of
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
After reading the subject alone, my reaction was is this sorting
commits by the name of the author?
That is one of the expected natural reactions when people hear about
this option, which is not what you want.
Perhaps
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
elliottcable m...@ell.io writes:
Thus, I've added an --authorship-order version of --date-order, which relies
upon the AUTHOR_DATE instead of the COMMITTER_DATE; this means that old
commits
will continue to show up
feel like an idiot. Forgive me. I'll --signoff my next version of
the patch. o7
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Elliott Cable m...@ell.io writes:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
elliottcable m...@ell.io writes:
Thus
I use a fairly complex `git-log` command involving `--date-order` to
get an overview of my repository's status; but unfortunately,
`--date-order` seems to use the *committer* date, not the *author*
date. That means that each time I bring my topic branches up to date
by rebasing them onto the
12 matches
Mail list logo
