Then submodules in different worktrees will be fully independent.
They can, and should, be initialised and updated separately.
Update t7410-submodule-checkout-to.sh to consider this.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
Now when there is implementation for worktree-specific module it is possible
to
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 07:14:39PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> The general principle is like in the last mail: .git/config is for
> both shared and private keys of main worktree (i.e. nothing is
> changed from today). .git/worktrees/xx/config.worktree is for
> private keys only (and p
On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 01:49:34PM -0700, Jonathon Mah wrote:
> During a few years of discussing git operations with colleagues, I’ve found
> the “git rebase --onto” operation particularly ambiguous. The reason is that
> I always describe a rebase operation as “onto” something else (because of th
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 08:25:33AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> I'm not sure if "it" means $GIT_DIR/config.worktree or
> $GIT_DIR/info/config.worktree. At this point $GIT_COMMON_DIR is not
> involved (i.e. you can still spit config even in a normal repo).
> .../info/config.worktree may be shared, I g
test 'not prune recent checkouts' to remove the worktree before
pruning - link in worktrees still must survive. In older form it is
useless because would pass always when the other test passes.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
builtin/prune.c | 10 +++---
t/t2026-prune
On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> In our test scripts, it is also OK to just "return 1", because
> the test snippets execute inside a function.
Thanks, sounds like a plan.
--
Max
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majo
Hi.
As far as I can see, loops in shell ignore non-zero exit
codes of the bodies which are not last. For example, exit
code of command 'for f in false true; do $f; done' is 0,
even if there was false.
How should one workaround it in test scripts, is there any
established approach?
--
Max
--
To
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:04:24PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> When you define $GIT_DIR/info/config.worktree, which contains of
> gitignore-style patterns (*), config variables that match these
> patterns will be saved in $GIT_DIR/config.worktree instead of
> $GIT_DIR/config.
Should it ra
On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 09:36:43AM -0800, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> I wonder if it's worth all the hassle to invent new names. Wouldn't
> it be much better to just keep a list of per-worktree configuration
> value names and use that inside the config code to decide where to
> find them for multiple wor
After http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/261990
the only thing which did not enter the serie is these 2 pathes.
Should be applied over the patches by link, or
ecf2ff6ace6a1cc3d55b6f917be5452b5fb0c21b in current pu.
Max Kirillov (2):
submodule refactor: use
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
submodule.c | 28 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index 34094f5..4aad3d4 100644
--- a/submodule.c
+++ b/submodule.c
@@ -122,43 +122,35 @@ void stage_updated_gitmodules(void
: Max Kirillov
---
cache.h | 1 +
path.c | 24
setup.c | 17 -
t/t7410-submodule-checkout-to.sh | 10 ++
4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cache.h
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:08 AM, Akshay Aurora wrote:
> Not sure, why this mail is not showing on Gmane.
> I used git to send the email, and tested it by sending the patch to
> myself before sending it to the list.
Gmail knows: "Why is this message in Spam? It has a from address in
yahoo.com but h
The changes:
* remove unused views_modified_names assignment
* use if {[catch...] to check saving error
* split error reporting from busy wait
The busy wait parameters are unchanged, mostly because I did not have time yet
to test them.
Max Kirillov (3):
gitk: write only changed configuration
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index 5f09756..9404d5d 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2811,7 +2811,7 @@ proc savestuff {w} {
if {$stuffsaved} return
if {![winfo viewable .]} return
-catch
eport it abort the saving, as
other saving error does.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 29 ++---
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index 9404d5d..b2cfd47 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2776,6 +2776,19 @@ proc doprogu
nd resises windows, and there is no way to find which one of
the geometries is most desired. Just overwrite them unconditionally,
like earlier.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 86
1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 10 deletion
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 11:10:51AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> The idea looks good; I have a couple of comments on the patch. First,
> 50 tries over 5 seconds seems a bit excessive to me, wouldn't (say) 20
> tries be enough? Is the 50 the result of some analysis?
5 seconds was just my persona
On Mon, Mar 02, 2015 at 10:47:30AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:20:01AM +0200, Max Kirillov wrote:
>> +lappend views_modified_names $current_viewname($v)
>
> This view_modified_names variable doesn't seem to be used anywhere.
> If y
On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 04:41:27PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> The goal seems to be using multiple checkouts to reduce disk space.
> But we have not reached an agreement how things should be. There are a
> couple options.
>
> - You may want to keep $SUB repos elsewhere (perhaps in a cent
Hello. Thank you for the fix.
Would it be more reliable to compare inode of directory in question
and ".git"? (there is [*] for windows). So that any unspotted name
equivalence is prevented to cause any harm.
*)
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7162164/does-windows-have-inode-numbers-like-linu
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 06:44:40AM +0200, Max Kirillov wrote:
> After discussions I came to basically same as v1.
>
> * Resubmitting the 2 patches which have not been taken to worktrees reroll -
> they fix visible issue. Mostly unchanged except small cleanup in test.
> * Added GI
: Max Kirillov
---
cache.h | 1 +
path.c | 24
setup.c | 17 -
t/t7410-submodule-checkout-to.sh | 10 ++
4 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/cache.h
This is obviously right thing to do, because submodule repository does
not use common directory of super repository.
Suggested-by: Jens Lehmann
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
environment.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/environment.c b/environment.c
index 8351007..85ce3c4
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
submodule.c | 28 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index 34094f5..4aad3d4 100644
--- a/submodule.c
+++ b/submodule.c
@@ -122,43 +122,35 @@ void stage_updated_gitmodules(void
le to observe any change in behavior.
Max Kirillov (3):
submodule refactor: use git_path_submodule() in add_submodule_odb()
path: implement common_dir handling in git_path_submodule()
Add GIT_COMMON_DIR to local_repo_env
cache.h | 1 +
environm
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 09:40:59PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Huh? I think we already have that: If you ignore the url
> config it's as if the submodule was never initialized, so
> you can just *not* run the "git submodule update" command
> at all to get that effect. No new option needed ;-)
You
On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 08:42:30AM +0200, Max Kirillov wrote:
>> *) I'd love to see a solution for sharing the object database
>>between otherwise unrelated clones of the same project (so
>>that fetching in one clone updates the objects in the common
>>dir
On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 02:06:08PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 05.12.2014 um 07:32 schrieb Max Kirillov:
>> Currently I'm estimating approach when submodules which have .git
>> file or directory inside are updated, and those which do not have it are not.
>> I ha
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> But I'd need to have separate settings for
> our CI server, e.g. to checkout the sources without the
> largish documentation submodule in one test job (=worktree)
> while checking out the whole documentation for another job
> building the setu
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 09:45:24PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
>> But, while hacking the submodule init I became more
>> convinced that the modules directory should be common and
>> submodules in checkout should be a checkouts of the
>> submodule. Because this is looks like concept of
>> submodules,
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 05:43:16PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:27 AM, Max Kirillov wrote:
>> But, while hacking the submodule init I became more
>> convinced that the modules directory should be common and
>> submodules in checkout should be a checkout
repository
and checkout to new worktree at "submodule update --init"
path.c, setup.c, submodule.c: fix "diff --submodule" when
submodule is a linked worktree
t/t7410-submodule-checkout-to.sh: tests for all the above
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
Hi.
Thanks for including my
On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:59:28PM +0600, Alex Kuleshov wrote:
>
> Hello Max and Paul,
>
> thank you for your feedback, so what's must be my next workflow? Resend
> patch with "Reviewed-By:..." or somethine else?
To be honest I don't know. The only time I had such an
answer maintainer put the fl
Hi.
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:05:28PM +0600, 0xAX wrote:
> Signed-off-by: 0xAX
> -"(все изменения в рабочем каталоги будут потеряны)"
> +"(все изменения в рабочем каталоге будут потеряны)"
I cannot say I see much sense to use software like Git with
translations to national languages, but I con
abort the saving, because this
is how gitk used to handle errors while saving.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 33 ++---
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index ed4f71e..692d880 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2776,6 +27
nd resises windows, and there is no way to find which one of
the geometries is most desired. Just overwrite them unconditionally,
like earlier.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 87
1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 10 deletion
v3 did not actually work for views.
Fix it (add global) and also set viewchanged in delview
Max Kirillov (2):
gitk: write only changed configuration variables
gitk: synchronize config write
gitk | 120 +++
1 file changed, 107
abort the saving, because this
is how gitk used to handle errors while saving.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 33 ++---
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index f6409c2..0613264 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2776,6 +27
and there is no way to find which one of
the geometries is most desired. Just overwrite them unconditionally,
like earlier.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 82 +---
1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --gi
Hi.
Used explivit changed flag for views instead of trace. Minor style fixes.
As I said, could not use namespace for older config read because they leak to
globals.
Max Kirillov (2):
gitk: write only changed configuration variables
gitk: synchronize config write
gitk | 115
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 07:54:39PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> Ping.. any idea how to go from here..
I'm sorry, I happen to have little time since the last
conversation.
As far as I understand, my patches are correct about
handling existing submodules, but they may be not enough
regarding _initial
014 at 11:35:58PM +0300, Max Kirillov wrote:
> I'm also not convinced we need all the uses of upvar. Why do we need
> to use upvar to rename viewname, viewfiles etc. to current_viewname,
> etc.? If you're concerned about what might possibly be in the .gitk
> when you source it
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 09:30:15PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 16.10.2014 um 22:54 schrieb Max Kirillov:
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:57:20PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
>>> Am 15.10.2014 um 00:15 schrieb Max Kirillov:
>>>> I think the logic can be simple: it a
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 08:57:20PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 15.10.2014 um 00:15 schrieb Max Kirillov:
>> I think the logic can be simple: it a submodule is not
>> checked-out in the repository "checkout --to" is called
>> from, then it is not checked-out t
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:51:22PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 14.10.2014 um 20:34 schrieb Max Kirillov:
>> But here are a lot of nuances. For example, it makes
>> sense to have a superproject checkout without submodules
>> being initialized (so that they don't waste
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:09:45PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Until that problem is solved it looks wrong to pass
> GIT_COMMON_DIR into submodule recursion, I believe
> GIT_COMMON_DIR should be added to the local_repo_env array
> (and even if it is passed on later, we might have to
> append "/mod
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:26:42AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> And multiple-worktree _is_ about keeping the same repository and
> history data (i.e. object database, refs, rerere database, reflogs for
> refs/*) only once, while allowing multiple working trees attached to
> that single copy.
>
>
because it would mean common
directory for the parent repository and does not make sense for
submodule.
Also add test for functionality which uses this call.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
cache.h | 1 +
path.c | 24 ---
the common dir of
the main repository, and probably this is how "checkout --to" should
initialize them called on the main repository, but they also should work
fine being completely separated clones.
Testfile t7410-submodule-checkout-to.sh demostrates the behavior.
Signed-off-by: Ma
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
submodule.c | 28 ++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index 34094f5..4aad3d4 100644
--- a/submodule.c
+++ b/submodule.c
@@ -122,43 +122,35 @@ void stage_updated_gitmodules(void
Hi.
These are fixes of issues with submodules with use of multiple working
trees.
To be applied on top of the $gmane/257559, (6b4ce012cb in current pu).
Max Kirillov (4):
checkout: do not fail if target is an empty directory
submodule refactor: use git_path_submodule() in add_submodule_odb
non-empty directory.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
builtin/checkout.c | 2 +-
t/t2025-checkout-to.sh | 7 ++-
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/checkout.c b/builtin/checkout.c
index 01d0f2f..74eabe7 100644
--- a/builtin/checkout.c
+++ b/builtin/checkout.c
abort the saving, because this
is how gitk used to handle errors while saving.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 33 ++---
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index e76445b..c65103e 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2771,6 +27
ally,
like earlier.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 100 +--
1 file changed, 92 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index bc57c11..e76445b 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2771,12 +2771,51 @@ proc do
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 88
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index c8df35d..bc57c11 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2772,23 +2772,11 @@ proc doprogupdate
config file
Max Kirillov (3):
gitk refactor: remove boilerplate for configuration variables
gitk: write only changed configuration variables
gitk: synchronize config write
gitk | 215 +++
1 file changed, 139 insertions(+), 76
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:19:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Max Kirillov writes:
>
>> If a variable is changed in a concurrent gitk or manually it is
>> preserved unless it has changed in this instance
>
> It would have been easier to understand why this is a d
Only new and modified views are saved; old ones are saved also
if there are no new, modified or deleted view with same name.
This allows editing view list in concurrent gitk sessions without
losing the changes.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 42
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 88
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index 6fb6cb3..6069afe 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2805,23 +2805,11 @@ proc doprogupdate
existing data in configuration.
Max Kirillov (3):
gitk refactor: remove boilerplate for configuration variables
gitk: write only changed configuration variables
gitk: merge views with existing ones
gitk | 159 ---
1 file changed
list.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 41 +
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index 6069afe..6e22024 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2804,12 +2804,25 @@ proc doprogupdate {} {
}
}
+proc
rgument is specified. This has been discussed in [1] and stated
as expected behavior. So rev-parse's parameters should be tuned in gitk.
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/255996
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --gi
git fails with message "internal error: work tree has
already been set"
Fix by setting GIT_WORK_TREE environment also.
Add test which demonstrates problem with alias.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
setup.c| 4 +++-
t/t0002-gitfile.sh | 9 +
2 files changed,
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 06:44:08AM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > + mkdir -p subdir &&
> > + cd subdir &&
> > + git testalias
>
> If a new test is added following this one, it will be run from within
> 'subdir', which might come as a surprise as the author of the new
> test. Wra
On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 05:53:34PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:42 AM, Max Kirillov wrote:
>> /* #0, #1, #5, #8, #9, #12, #13 */
>> set_git_work_tree(".");
>
> I wonder if we should setenv(GIT_WORK_TREE_) from inside this fun
git fails with message "internal error: work tree has
already been set"
Fix by setting GIT_WORK_TREE environment also.
Add test which demonstrates problem with alias.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
setup.c| 4 +++-
t/t0002-gitfile.sh | 7 +++
2 files changed, 10 inser
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 09:59:17AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> I would rather see "rev-parse --all" not to include HEAD,
> especially if it has been documented that way.
Ok, then probably I'll want to change it in gitk.
But, with the "multiple working trees" feature, I would also
want to ge
HEAD is not explicitly used as a starting commit for
calculating reachability, so if it's detached and reflogs
are disabled it may be pruned.
Add tests which demonstrate it. Test 'prune: prune former HEAD after checking
out branch' also reverts changes to repository.
Signed-off-b
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 01:24:48AM +0300, Max Kirillov wrote:
>
>> for_each_ref() does not include it itself, and without
>> the hash the detached HEAD may be missed by some
>> frontends (like gitk).
>>
HEAD is not explicitly used as a starting commit for
calculating reachability, so if it's detached and reflogs
are disabled it may be pruned.
Add tests which demonstrate it. Test 'prune: prune former HEAD after checking
out branch' also reverts changes to repository.
Signed-off-b
for_each_ref() does not include it itself, and without the hash
the detached HEAD may be missed by some frontends (like gitk).
Add test which verifies the head is returned
Update test t6018-rev-list-glob.sh which relied on exact list of
returned hashes.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
builtin
HEAD is not explicitly used as a starting commit for
calculating reachability, so if it's detached and reflogs
are disabled it may be pruned.
Add test which demonstrates it.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
Hi.
This is a followup of
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/2
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> If you mean "git log", I think it is included there, too:
>
> $ git log --decorate --oneline --all
> 685450f (HEAD) more
> 1290ebd (master) foo
I meant "git log", did not know it's there. Where I actually would
like to see it in gitk --all
Hello.
Could HEAD be added to list of heads while using --all switch?
Detached heads are not something very unusual and incorrect, in
submodules for example, or for some scripts. Having to specify it
additionally when I meet such checkout feels like some flaw.
What are opinions on that, could it
Hi.
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Michael J Gruber
wrote:
> Duy Nguyen venit, vidit, dixit 18.07.2014 12:58:
>> This is what this series needs, user's opinions (bad or good).
Actually, if options "-b branch" works with the "--to" (does it?), then user
probably shouldn't need to create detache
Hi.
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 11:50:59AM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> +MULTIPLE CHECKOUT MODE
> +---
This generates incorrect html for me, making all section
until next heading "EXAMPLES" into a preformatted text. If I
justify the line of dashes to be the exactly
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 02:33:11PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> +static int check_linked_checkout(struct branch_info *new,
> + const char *name, const char *path)
> +{
...
> + if (!strncmp(start, new->path, end - start) &&
> + new->path[end - start]
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
Hi.
I was missing this one. Actually the most needed is go to first
parent, though the second also may be useful.
gitk | 12
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gitk b/gitk
index 41e5071..de35fe4 100755
--- a/gitk
+++ b/gitk
@@ -2594,6
On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 12:49:01PM +0200, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
> I do intend to use checkout --to and submodule update on the same
> repository, but have not yet done so. I will poke at that later this
> month. If you can easily reproduce errors, I would appreciate to know
> how, because my us
Hi.
What future does this have? Currently it is marked as
"Stalled", but still mergeable with some trivial conflicts
and seem to be working (except some bugs in interaction with
submodules, see below). It would be very nice if this
feature is officially supported.
I also have a comment about how
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 04:08:28PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> What could be improved with them?
>
> Oh, I would name the files more appropriately, for example. That is,
> instead of test1.txt I would call it mixed-endings.txt or lf-only.txt or
> some such.
>
> And instead of the Latin v
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 04:55:10PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> I just wish the tests were a little easier to understand...
What could be improved with them?
> Having said that, here is my ACK for the current revision
> of the patch series
Thanks.
By the way, for "\r\n" eol it did even w
s failing -
they look like legitimate expectations, just not satisfied at time
being.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
t/t6023-merge-file.sh | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t6023-merge-file.sh b/t/t6023-merge-file.sh
index d9f3439..6da921c 100755
--- a
between versions.
* some more tests which I felt like not covering the functionality well
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
t/t6023-merge-file.sh | 85 +++
xdiff/xmerge.c| 4 +--
2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git
I realized the case when the newline adding can be needed.
The version 2 have this case (union-merge of changes at EOF without LF)
fixed, with adding corresponding tests.
Max Kirillov (2):
t6023-merge-file.sh: fix and mark as broken invalid tests
git-merge-file: do not add LF at EOF while
s failing -
they look like legitimate expectations, just not satisfied at time
being.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
t/t6023-merge-file.sh | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/t6023-merge-file.sh b/t/t6023-merge-file.sh
index d9f3439..6da921c 100755
--- a
d tests "merge without conflict (missing LF at EOF, away from
change in the other file)" and "merge does not add LF away of change",
to demonstrate the changed behavior.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
t/t6023-merge-file.sh | 66 ++
opely they will be fixed some day.
Max Kirillov (2):
t6023-merge-file.sh: fix and mark as broken invalid tests
git-merge-file: do not add LF at EOF while applying unrelated change
t/t6023-merge-file.sh | 72 ---
xdiff/xmerge.c| 4 +-
Hi.
If a file does not contain newline in the last line, and the file has
changed somewhere
in other branch, and the newline has not been not added in that
change, when I cherry-pick the commit, the commit does contain the
newline in the last line. This sometimes leads to conflict and in
general l
-L will be mature
enough to be used for picking the single line origin, for now the best
option is to implement region logic separately, reusing the blame's basic io.
For diffs, the first parent is always searched. This decision is quite
voluntary, just to avoid complications to UI.
Signed-of
On Mon, Feb 03, 2014 at 06:20:36PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Max Kirillov wrote:
>> For requesting a region blame, it is necessary to parse a hunk and
>> find the region in the parent file corresponding to the selected region.
>> There i
The pattern of maintaining blame command and collecting output
can be reused for searching of latest change to region.
It still can use the blame's global variables, because the two
search commands should not run concurrently as well as two instances
of blame.
Signed-off-by: Max Kir
{}, scans the hunk once and returns
for all hunk lines between $start_diffline and $end_diffline, in which parent
each of them exists and which is its number there.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 93 ++--
1 file changed, 57
There seems to be no point to search for several origins at once.
Probably is is not even fully working (because there is one blameinst),
but blamestuff for some reason is an array. Also, it is not cleaned
after blame is completed.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 13 -
1 file
Changes vs v1:
* Rebase to latest gitk master
* Fix typos in commments
* Switch to patch mode at showing the found change
Max Kirillov (4):
gitk: use single blamestuff for all show_line_source{} calls
gitk: refactor: separate generic hunk parsing out of
find_hunk_blamespecs
~/.gitk. It contains a list
of references which are always shown before "and many more" if they
contain the commit. By default it is `{"master"}', which is compatible
with previous behavior.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
gitk | 10 ++
1 file changed, 6 inser
ecause
it was explicitly listing the extra newline. Also the msg.nologff and
msg.nolognoff expected files are replaced by one msg.nolog, because they
were diffing because of the bug, and now there should be no difference.
Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov
---
Changes compared to v2:
* fixed && chaini
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 07:57:08AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 5/13/2014 1:10, schrieb Max Kirillov:
>> --- a/t/t7007-show.sh
>> +++ b/t/t7007-show.sh
>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ test_expect_success 'set up a bit of history' '
>> git checkout -
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:26:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Hmph. Having these as two separate commits would mean that 1/2
> alone will break the test, hurting bisectability a little bit. The
> necessary adjustments in this patch is small enough that we may be
> better off squashing them in
201 - 300 of 337 matches
Mail list logo
