Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Even if you think "the right way" is to add to the iterators, I > suspect that we can still do incremental fixes? I agree with the > order of importance Michael listed in his message (i.e. the index > and the HEAD first,

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Junio C Hamano writes: > I do not recall seeing that. I however deliberately ignored another > statement because I thought it enough to answer, which was: Oops. "because I didn't think I thought it enough to answer" was what I meant.

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Duy Nguyen writes: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >>> Also, the more important reply was Peff's reply that suggested that the >>> proposed fix was incomplete, as it

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> Also, the more important reply was Peff's reply that suggested that the >> proposed fix was incomplete, as it misses --unpack-unreachable: >>

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Johannes Schindelin writes: > Also, the more important reply was Peff's reply that suggested that the > proposed fix was incomplete, as it misses --unpack-unreachable: > https://public-inbox.org/git/20160601160143.ga9...@sigill.intra.peff.net/ While I think that

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Hi Duy, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Duy, > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Johannes Schindelin > > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > > > >> You meant this one [1]?

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Hi Duy, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Johannes Schindelin > >> wrote: > >> > >

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Duy, > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Johannes Schindelin >> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: >> > >> >> On

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Hi Duy, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Johannes Schindelin > >> wrote: > >> > >

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Duy, > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Johannes Schindelin >> wrote: >> > Hi Duy, >> > >> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Hi Duy, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > Hi Duy, > > > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > > > >> This squashes two changes from Johannes and Ramsay: [...] > > > > Sorry, I lost

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Duy, > > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > >> This squashes two changes from Johannes and Ramsay: [...] > > Sorry, I lost track of the worktree discussions... Could you remind me > which

Re: [PATCH 00/11] nd/worktree-move update

Hi Duy, On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > This squashes two changes from Johannes and Ramsay: [...] Sorry, I lost track of the worktree discussions... Could you remind me which patch is supposed to fix my continuous reflog corruption? Thanks, Dscho