Re: [ANNOUNCE] git-push-update, tool to push with "server-side" merge or rebase

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 11:08:41AM +0300, Max Kirillov wrote: > Hello. > > I would like to announce git-push-update, a tool which emulates > server-side merge or rebase. > > The link: https://github.com/max630/git-push-update > > It is a bash script which fetches latest remote branch, creates >

Re: [PATCHv2] builtin/clone: support submodule groups

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 04:31:24PM -0800, Stefan Beller wrote: > This passes each group to the `submodule update` invocation and > additionally configures the groups to be automatically updated. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller > --- > > This is a resend of the patch "[PATCH

[PATCH] bisect: stop printing raw diff of first bad commit

Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org --- The test change only kind of tests the change in behavior and doesn't seem all that useful. However I'm not sure if its preferable to not even try and test that something isn't output. bisect.c| 7 ++- t/t6030

Re: [PATCH] bisect: print abbrev sha1 for first bad commit

On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 12:07:04AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 10:03:41PM -0400, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 05:29:42PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org wrote: its rather silly

Re: support git+mosh for unreliable connections

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 04:41:42PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: Hi Praveen, On 2015-04-15 16:18, Pirate Praveen wrote: On Wednesday 15 April 2015 07:22 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote: What would that require git to do, beyond taking whatever you tell it (using GIT_SSH or

Re: support git+mosh for unreliable connections

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 07:46:15PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: Hi Trevor, On 2015-04-15 17:33, Trevor Saunders wrote: On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 04:41:42PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: On 2015-04-15 16:18, Pirate Praveen wrote: On Wednesday 15 April 2015 07:22 PM, Michael J

Re: Requesting `git stash --cached` or something similar

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 02:24:04PM -0700, Quinn Taylor wrote: I'm still fairly new to git (coming from svn) and have found `git stash` to be really useful for storing in-progress work to resume later, as one might otherwise do with diff/patch files. (With the git tools I use, I find `git

Re: Requesting `git stash --cached` or something similar

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 10:05:02PM -0400, Brandon McCaig wrote: Trevor: On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org wrote: I would expect the answers to be it sets the working directories state to the state in HEAD, and leaves untracked files alone. If that's

Re: [PATCH, RFC] checkout: Attempt to checkout submodules

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 09:01:48PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote: Am 20.03.2015 um 01:13 schrieb Trevor Saunders: On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 02:15:19PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org writes: I have a feeling that an optional feature that allows git submodule

Re: [PATCH, RFC] checkout: Attempt to checkout submodules

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 02:15:19PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org writes: On one hand it seems kind of user hostile to just toss out any changes in the submodule that are uncommitted, on the other for any other path it would seem weird to have git

Re: [PATCH, RFC] checkout: Attempt to checkout submodules

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:53:10AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org writes: If a user does git checkout HEAD -- path/to/submodule they'd expect the submodule to be checked out to the commit that submodule is at in HEAD. Hmmm. Is it a good idea to do

[PATCH, RFC] checkout: Attempt to checkout submodules

internals and I'm not sure if this is even wanted so I'm starting simple. If people want this to work I can try and do something better. Signed-off-by: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org --- entry.c | 22 -- 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/entry.c

Re: feature request: excluding files/paths from git grep

On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 03:22:11PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org writes: ... For these per-invocation differences, attributes to declare permenent/inherent nature of the contents is much less suited than per-invocation inclusion/exclusion mechanism

Re: feature request: excluding files/paths from git grep

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 07:06:16PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: Trevor Saunders tbsau...@tbsaunde.org writes: There have been cases where I wanted grep to always ignore certain files, but to still get text diffs for those files. One case is people insist on using ChangeLog files

Re: feature request: excluding files/paths from git grep

On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 02:11:08PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:01:22AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: So I think _if_ using diff attributes is enough for this purpose, then there is no code to be written. But if somebody wants to