Junio C Hamano wrote:
Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes:
Shouldn't Documentation/gitworkflows.txt also be updated with the
triangular workflow and its configuration?
What is missing from gitworkflows documentation is actually a
non-triangular workflow, where people pull from and
Philip Oakley wrote:
From: Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:44 PM
This follows-up [1], with three important differences:
1. pushremote_get() and remote_get() share code better. Thanks Jeff.
2. All spelling mistakes have been corrected. Thanks
Tay Ray Chuan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
artag...@gmail.com wrote:
remote.c: introduce remote.pushdefault
remote.c: introduce branch.name.pushremote
Perhaps we should clarify how this differs from remote.pushurl in the
documentation for it, in
Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org writes:
Shouldn't Documentation/gitworkflows.txt also be updated with the
triangular workflow and its configuration?
What is missing from gitworkflows documentation is actually a
non-triangular workflow, where people pull from and push into the
same central
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:44 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
artag...@gmail.com wrote:
remote.c: introduce remote.pushdefault
remote.c: introduce branch.name.pushremote
Perhaps we should clarify how this differs from remote.pushurl in the
documentation for it, in git-config and/or git-push. Maybe
From: Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:44 PM
This follows-up [1], with three important differences:
1. pushremote_get() and remote_get() share code better. Thanks Jeff.
2. All spelling mistakes have been corrected. Thanks Eric.
3. One new test for
6 matches
Mail list logo
