Re: gitpacker progress report and a question

Felipe Contreras : > Most of those old projects have a linear history, INTERCAL didn't. There were two branches for platform ports. > But different commit/author and respective dates, and merges? Sounds > like overkill. I felt it was important that the metadata format be able to specify git's e

pandora sale is certainly worth it

pandora sale is one of the most sought after items of jewellery. This is for many reasons. Firstly, a Pandora diamond or necklace can be bought initially, but after the first purchase, consumers will both want to and need to buy more Pandora jewellery to add t

[PATCH 0/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): minor cleanup

Hi, This is the result of one lazy afternoon. Ram Ramkumar Ramachandra (4): t4041 (diff-submodule-option): parse digests sensibly t4041 (diff-submodule-option): rewrite add_file() routine t4041 (diff-submodule-option): modernize style t4041 (diff-submodule-option): change tense of test n

[PATCH 1/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): parse digests sensibly

`git rev-list --max-count=1 HEAD` is a roundabout way of saying `git rev-parse --verify HEAD`; replace a bunch of instances of the former with the latter. Also, don't unnecessarily `cut -c1-7` the rev-parse output when the `--short` option is available. Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra --- t

[PATCH 2/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): rewrite add_file() routine

Instead of "cd there and then come back", use the "cd there in a subshell" pattern. Also fix '&&' chaining in one place. Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra --- t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh | 13 + 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

[PATCH 3/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): modernize style

- Enclose tests in single quotes as opposed to double quotes. This is the prevalent style in other tests. - Remove the unused variable $head4_full. - Indent the expected output so that it lines up with the rest of the test text. Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra --- t/t4041-diff-submodule

[PATCH 4/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): change tense of test names

Change the tense of test names from past to present, as this is the prevalent style. Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra --- t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh | 24 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh b/t/t40

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:54 AM, David Aguilar wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Felipe Contreras > wrote: >> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Graphical_User_Interfaces > > *cough* git-cola *cough* > > it runs everywhere. Yes, windows too. It's written in python. > It's been actively m

Re: gitpacker progress report and a question

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Felipe Contreras : >> Most of those old projects have a linear history, > > INTERCAL didn't. There were two branches for platform ports. Fine: tag v0.1 gst-av-0.1.tar "Release 0.1" tag v0.2 gst-av-0.2.tar "Release 0.2" checkout port1 tag

Re: [PATCH 0.5/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): don't hardcode SHA-1 in expected outputs

Ugh, line wrapping breaks my patch. I've attached a copy. Ram 0001-t4041-diff-submodule-option-don-t-hardcode-SHA-1-in-.patch Description: Binary data

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM, David Aguilar wrote: > *cough* git-cola *cough* > > it runs everywhere. Yes, windows too. It's written in python. > It's been actively maintained since 2007. > > It's "modern" and has features that don't exist anywhere else. > > It even has tests. It even comes

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM, David Aguilar wrote: > >> *cough* git-cola *cough* >> >> it runs everywhere. Yes, windows too. It's written in python. >> It's been actively maintained since 2007. >> >> It's "modern" and has features tha

Re: [PATCH 5/5] git-send-email: allow edit invalid email address

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 03:50:30PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Krzysztof Mazur writes: > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 02:58:58PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Krzysztof Mazur writes: > >> > >> >> Not having this new code inside "elsif (/^e/) { }" feels somewhat > >> >> sloppy, even though

Antw: Re: diff support for the Eiffel language?

Hi! I managed to have some success, although it's not perfect. Unfortunately the Eiffel grammar does not allow a 100% solution. Example: --- local x : BOOLEAN --- declares a local variable named `x', while --- x : BOOLEAN do ... end --- Declares a function named `x'. Formal generic param

Re: [RFC/PATCH] l10n: de.po: translate 825 new messages

> #: builtin/pack-refs.c:6 > msgid "git pack-refs [options]" > -msgstr "" > +msgstr "git pack-refs [Optionen]" > > #: builtin/pack-refs.c:14 > msgid "pack everything" > -msgstr "" > +msgstr "packt alles" > > #: builtin/pack-refs.c:15 > msgid "prune loose refs (default)" > -msgstr "" > +ms

Re: [PATCH] Third try at documenting command integration requirements.

On 11/26/2012 10:41 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > The next things on my git to-do list are > [...] > 2. Submit a doc patch containing guidelines that (a) Python scripts should >check for their floor version and error out gracefully if they won't >run with the host's interpreter, and (b) Pyt

Re: [RFC/PATCH] l10n: de.po: translate 825 new messages

Hi Ralf, This is the middle third of my review. Sorry for the long wait! I hope it can still be useful. Also, sorry for the other mail that I just sent out seconds ago. That was what I wanted to save as "to be done in the last third", but I accidentally hit the wrong key and sent it out. - Th

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 06:40 EST, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Michael Haggerty > wrote: [...] > > On the contrary, there is *constant* traffic on the mailing list > > about incompatibilities between different shell implementations (sh, > > dash, ba

Re: [msysGit] Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

Hi David, On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, David Aguilar wrote: > *cough* git-cola *cough* If you had a couple of free cycles to help us get Python/Qt compiled in msysGit, I will be happy to make a Git for Windows package including git-cola. Ciao, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu

[PATCH] Extend runtime prefix computation

Support determining the binaries' installation path at runtime even if called without any path components (i.e. via search path). Implement fallback to compiled-in prefix if determination fails or is impossible. Signed-off-by: Michael Weiser --- - Has two very minor memory leaks - function is cal

Re: [PATCH v6 p2 3/9] transport-helper: trivial code shuffle

Felipe Contreras writes: > Just shuffle the die() part to make it more explicit, and cleanup the > code-style. > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras > --- > transport-helper.c | 7 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/transport-helper.c b/transport-helper.c >

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: improve phrasing in git-push.txt

Sounds better; thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 7/7] push: clarify rejection of update to non-commit-ish

Chris Rorvick writes: >> With this code, the old must be a commit but new can be a tag that >> points at a commit? Why? > > The old must not be a tag because fast-forwarding from it is > potentially destructive; a tag would likely be left dangling in this > case. This is not true for the new, t

Re: [PATCH 5/7] push: require force for refs under refs/tags/

Chris Rorvick writes: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Chris Rorvick writes: >> >>> diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c >>> index 4a6f822..012b52f 100644 >>> --- a/remote.c >>> +++ b/remote.c >>> @@ -1315,14 +1315,18 @@ void set_ref_status_for_push(struct ref >>> *remo

Re: [PATCH] Support for git aliasing for tcsh completion

The patch was linewrapped so I had to fix it up; please double check what will be queued on 'pu' to make sure that I did not miss necessary whitespaces or added unnecessary ones when I rejoined long lines. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a m

Re: Interesting git-format-patch bug

per...@pluto.rain.com (Perry Hutchison) writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> "Olsen, Alan R" writes: >> > I found an interesting bug in git-format-patch. >> > >> > Say you have a branch A. You create branch B and add a patch to >> > it. You then merge that patch into branch A. After the merge, >>

Re: [PATCH 1/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): parse digests sensibly

Ramkumar Ramachandra writes: > `git rev-list --max-count=1 HEAD` is a roundabout way of saying `git > rev-parse --verify HEAD`; replace a bunch of instances of the former > with the latter. Also, don't unnecessarily `cut -c1-7` the rev-parse > output when the `--short` option is available. > > S

[PATCH 0/6] Improve remote helper documentation

Various remote helper capabilities and commands were not documented, in particular 'export', or documented in a misleading way (e.g. 'for-push' was listed as a ref attribute understood by git, which is not the case). This patch series changes that, and also address some other things in the remote h

[PATCH 6/6] Remove 'for-push' from ref list attributes list, link to subsections

The documentation was misleading in that it gave the impression that 'for-push' could be used as a ref attribute in the output of the 'list' command. That is wrong. Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 13 - 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-

[PATCH 4/6] Rearrange the description of remote helper capabilities

This also remove some duplication in the descriptions (e.g. refspec was explained twice with similar level of detail) Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 134 +++ 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) diff --git a/Docume

[PATCH 2/6] Document missing remote helper capabilities

The 'export' and '(im|ex)port-marks' capabilities were not documented at all Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 45 +--- 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt b/Document

[PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar

Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt b/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt index db63541..7eb43d7 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt +++ b/D

[PATCH 1/6] Document invocation first, then input format

In the distant past, the order was 'Invocation', 'Commands', 'Capabilities', ... Then it was decided that before giving a list of Commands, there should be an overall description of the 'Input format', which was a wise decision. However, this description was put as the very first thing, with the r

[PATCH 5/6] Make clearer which commands must be supported for which capabilities

In particular, document 'list for-push' separately from 'list', as the former needs only be supported for the 'push' capability, and the latter only for fetch/import/export. In particular, a hypothetically 'push-only' helper only needs to support the former, not the latter. Signed-off-by: Max Horn

Re: [PATCH 4/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): change tense of test names

Ramkumar Ramachandra writes: > Change the tense of test names from past to present, as this is the > prevalent style. > > Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra > --- I see most of them are not "past" but "past particle" used as if they are adjectives. For example, I think this test > -test_expe

Re: [PATCH] Third try at documenting command integration requirements.

Michael Haggerty : > OK, now let's discuss *which* minimum Python version that git should > support in the hypothetical new world... By all means! > It would be a shame to leave RHEL 5 users behind if Python is used to > implement important git functionality. Python 2.4 is missing some of > Pyt

Re: [PATCH 2/4] t4041 (diff-submodule-option): rewrite add_file() routine

Ramkumar Ramachandra writes: > Instead of "cd there and then come back", use the "cd there in a > subshell" pattern. Also fix '&&' chaining in one place. > > Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano > Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra > --- > t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh | 13 + > 1 f

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] git-submodule add: Add --local-branch option

Hi, On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:00:15PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > From: "W. Trevor King" > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:54:02PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > > We could add > > > > $ git submodule update --branch > > > > to checkout the gitlinked SHA1 as submodule..branch in each of > > t

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

Magnus Bäck : > While "constant traffic" probably overstates the issue, these are not > theoretical problems. I recall at least three cases in the last year > or so where Git has seen breakage with Solaris or Mac OS X because > of sed or tr incompatibilities, and I don't even read this list that >

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] git-submodule update: Add --branch option

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:00:18PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > From: "W. Trevor King" > > This allows users to checkout the current > superproject-recorded-submodule-sha as a branch, avoiding the detached > head state that the standard submodule update creates. This may be > useful for the ex

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] git-submodule add: Add --local-branch option

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > I would prefer if we could squash all these commits together into > one since it seems to me one logical step, using the new variable > for update belongs together with its configuration on > initialization. Works for me. I could also

Re: [PATCH] diff: Fixes shortstat number of files

Antoine Pelisse writes: > Indeed stat seems to be broken on master by commit 74faaa16 from Linus > Torvalds > > There are three separated issues here: > - unmerged files are marked as "interesting" in stat and probably > shouldn't, with some patch like this: > > data->is_interesting = p

Re: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] git-submodule add: Add --local-branch option

Hi, I just realized that I gave you an confusing suggestion. On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > if test "$subsha1" != "$sha1" > then > handle_on_demand_fetch_update ... > else > handle_tracked_branch_update ... > fi

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] git-submodule add: Add --local-branch option

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:00:15PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > > From: "W. Trevor King" > > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:54:02PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > > > We could add > > > > > > $ git submodule update --branch > > >

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] git-submodule update: Add --branch option

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:51:42PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:00:18PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > > -b:: > > --branch:: > > - Branch of repository to add as submodule. > > + When used with the add command, gives the branch of repository to > > + add as submodu

Re: Operations on unborn branch

Martin von Zweigbergk writes: > simplify a lot of things (maybe I'm biased because of the things I > have happened to work on?) Yes. Do not waste time on it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo in

RE: Interesting git-format-patch bug

[Sorry for the top posting. Outlook is crap.] You are correct. I should only get one copy of the patch on branch A. Branch B was modified after the merge and git-format-patch includes the original patch from the merge and a duplicate copy with the changed comments. Note that this patch only ha

Re: git-gui: textconv not used on unstaged files

On 2012-11-26 21:54, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Peter Oberndorfer writes: > >> Does anybody have a idea which git command would output the diff >> of a untracked file against /dev/null? > The "--no-index" option is meant as a bolt-on to let you use various > features of "git diff" that is missing fro

Re: Operations on unborn branch

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Martin von Zweigbergk writes: > >> simplify a lot of things (maybe I'm biased because of the things I >> have happened to work on?) > > Yes. Do not waste time on it. Yes, no way I would waste time on that; I was mostly just curious. Wha

Re: [PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar

Max Horn writes: > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar Please run "git shortlog -200 --no-merges" from the tip of your topic branch before sending a series out, and see if you can immediately identify what area each of your patches affects. > Signed-off-by: Max Horn > --- > Documentation/git

Millisecond precision in timestamps?

Because I do a lot of work on repository conversion tools, I've had to learn a lot of detail about ontological mismatches between version-control systems - especially places where you lose metadata moving between them. In general, git metadata can carry forward almost all the metadata in a Subvers

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Magnus Bäck : >> While "constant traffic" probably overstates the issue, these are not >> theoretical problems. I recall at least three cases in the last year >> or so where Git has seen breakage with Solaris or Mac OS X because >> of sed

Re: difftool -d symlinks, under what conditions

On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, David Aguilar wrote: > It seems that there is an edge case here that we are not > accounting for: unmodified worktree paths, when checked out > into the temporary directory, can be edited by the tool when > comparing against older commits. These edits will be lost.

Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] Hack fix for 'submodule update does not fetch already present commits'

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 02:01:05PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 04:00:15PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > > > Because you need to recurse through submodules for `update --branch` > > > even if "$subsha1" == "

[PATCH 0/5] "diff --stat" counting fixes

It turns out that there are at least two bugs in the diffstat counting code. This series comes on top of the earlier 74faaa1 (Fix "git diff --stat" for interesting - but empty - file changes, 2012-10-17) to fix them. Junio C Hamano (5): test: add failing tests for "diff --stat" to t4049 diff

[PATCH 1/5] test: add failing tests for "diff --stat" to t4049

There are a few problems in diff.c around --stat area, partially caused by the recent 74faaa1 (Fix "git diff --stat" for interesting - but empty - file changes, 2012-10-17), and largely caused by the earlier change that introduced when --stat-count was added. Add a few test pieces to t4049 to expo

[PATCH 2/5] diff --stat: status of unmodified pair in diff-q is not zero

It is spelled DIFF_STATUS_UNKNOWN these days, and is different from zero. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- diff.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c index 95bbad6..ce6baa4 100644 --- a/diff.c +++ b/diff.c @@ -2411,7 +2411,7 @@ static void builtin

[PATCH 3/5] diff --stat: use "file" temporary variable to refer to data->files[i]

The generated code shouldn't change but it is easier to read. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- diff.c | 26 +- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c index ce6baa4..e4e70e5 100644 --- a/diff.c +++ b/diff.c @@ -1470,8 +1470,8 @@ st

[PATCH 5/5] diff --stat: do not count "unmerged" entries

Even though we show a separate *UNMERGED* entry in the patch and diffstat output (or in the --raw format, for that matter) in addition to and separately from the diff against the specified stage (defaulting to #2) for unmerged paths, they should not be counted in the total number of files affected-

[PATCH 4/5] diff --stat: move the "total count" logic to the last loop

The diffstat generation logic, with --stat-count limit, is implemented as three loops. - The first counts the width necessary to show stats up to specified number of entries, and notes up to how many entries in the data we need to iterate to show the graph; - The second iterates that many

Re: [PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar

On 27.11.2012, at 21:39, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Max Horn writes: > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar > > Please run "git shortlog -200 --no-merges" from the tip of your > topic branch before sending a series out, and see if you can > immediately identify what area each of your patches a

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Because I do a lot of work on repository conversion tools, I've had > to learn a lot of detail about ontological mismatches between > version-control systems - especially places where you lose metadata > moving between them. > > In general

RE: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

> -Original Message- > From: Eric S. Raymond > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 3:48 PM > > Because I do a lot of work on repository conversion tools, I've had > to learn a lot of detail about ontological mismatches between > version-control systems - especially places where you lose metad

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

Le mardi 27 novembre 2012 02:51:04 David Aguilar a écrit : > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:24 PM, David Aguilar wrote: > >> *cough* git-cola *cough* > >> > >> it runs everywhere. Yes, windows too. It's written in python. > >> It's been a

Re: [PATCH 3/6] Fix grammar

Max Horn writes: > If this is indeed it, would a commit message like > >git-remote-helper.txt: minor grammar fix Perfect. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kerne

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

Shawn Pearce writes: > JGit would fortunately ignore a floating point timestamp specification > if given in a commit, but I don't know about other Git > implementations... like say git. :-) fsck_ident() in fsck.c rejects anything but " [1-9][0-9]* " after the author and committer ident (i.e. the

[PATCH 6/5] diff --shortstat: do not count "unmerged" entries

Fix the same issue as the previous one for "git diff --stat"; unmerged entries was doubly-counted. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- diff.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/diff.c b/diff.c index 26ede82..374b235 100644 --- a/diff.c +++ b/diff.c @@ -1701,9

[PATCH v2 2/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: document missing capabilities

Specifically, document the 'export' and '(im|ex)port-marks' capabilities as well as the export command, which were undocumented (but in active use). Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 45 +--- 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 3 del

[PATCH v2 1/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: document invocation before input format

In the distant past, the order things were documented was 'Invocation', 'Commands', 'Capabilities', ... Then it was decided that before giving a list of Commands, there should be an overall description of the 'Input format', which was a wise decision. However, this description was put as the very

[PATCH v2 6/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: clarify options & ref list attributes

The documentation was misleading in that it gave the impression that 'for-push' could be used as a ref attribute in the output of the 'list' command. That is wrong. Also, explicitly point out the connection between the commands 'list' and 'options' on the one hand, and the sections 'REF LIST ATTRI

[PATCH 6/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: clarify ref list attributes, link to subsections

The documentation was misleading in that it gave the impression that 'for-push' could be used as a ref attribute in the output of the 'list' command. That is wrong. Also, explicitly point out the connection between the commands 'list' and 'options' on the one hand, and the sections 'REF LIST ATTRI

[PATCH v2 4/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: rearrange description of capabilities

This also remove some duplication in the descriptions (e.g. refspec was explained twice with similar level of detail). Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 134 +++ 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) diff --git a/Docum

[PATCH v2 3/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: minor grammar fix

Signed-off-by: Max Horn --- Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt b/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt index db63541..7eb43d7 100644 --- a/Documentation/git-remote-helpers.txt +++ b/D

[PATCH v2 5/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: clarify command <-> capability correspondences

In particular, document 'list for-push' separately from 'list', as the former needs only be supported for the push/export capabilities, and the latter only for fetch/import. Indeed, a hypothetically 'push-only' helper would only need to support the former, not the latter. Signed-off-by: Max Horn

[PATCH v2 0/6] Improve remote helper documentation

Various remote helper capabilities and commands were not documented, in particular 'export', or documented in a misleading way (e.g. 'for-push' was listed as a ref attribute understood by git, which is not the case). This patch series changes that, and also address some other things in the remote h

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

Junio C Hamano : > fsck_ident() in fsck.c rejects anything but " [1-9][0-9]* " after > the author and committer ident (i.e. the timestamp has to be > integral number of seconds since the epoch, not before it, nor > with fractional seconds). Is this architecturally significant? It sounds like anot

Re: [PATCH 6/6] git-remote-helpers.txt: clarify ref list attributes, link to subsections

Ouch. This one should *not* have been sent (the "[PATCH v2 6/6]" one is the correct one). Very sorry :(. I'll triple check next time. Max On 28.11.2012, at 00:03, Max Horn wrote: > The documentation was misleading in that it gave the impression that > 'for-push' could be used as a ref attribute

Re: Possible vulnerability to SHA-1 collisions

On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:09:31AM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Michael Hirshleifer <111...@caltech.edu> > wrote: > > Evil Guy creates 2 files, 1 evil and 1 innocuous, with the same SHA-1 > > checksum (including Git header). Mr. Evil creates a local branch with

[PATCH v2 3/3] Add option to transpose parents of merge commit

When the changes are pushed upstream, and in the meantime someone else updated upstream branch git advises to use git pull. This results in history: ---A---B---C-- \ / D---E where B is the local commit. D, E are commits pushed by someone else when the developer was wor

[PATCH v2 1/3] Process MERGE_MODE before MERGE_HEAD

It is in preparation to introduce --transpose-parents option to git-merge, when the content of MERGE_MODE will dictate how the MERGE_HEAD is interpreted. Signed-off-by: Kacper Kornet --- builtin/commit.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/com

[PATCH v2 2/3] Allow for MERGE_MODE to specify more then one mode

Presently only one merge mode exists: non-fast-forward. But in future the second one (transpose-parents) will be added, so the need to read all lines of MERGE_MODE. Signed-off-by: Kacper Kornet --- builtin/commit.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/

[PATCH v2 0/3] Add option to change order of parents in merge commit

The second version of patches introducing option to change order of parents in merge commits. The changes in respect to the previous version: - I have divided the changes to the preparatory ones, which only refactore the code without introducing new functionality, and the commit which introduc

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] git-submodule init: Record submodule..branch in repository config.

Am 26.11.2012 22:00, schrieb W. Trevor King: > From: "W. Trevor King" > > This allows users to override the .gitmodules value with a > per-repository value. Your intentions makes lots of sense, but your patch does more than that. Copying the branch setting into .git/config sets the initial branc

[PATCH] configure.ac: fix pthreads detection on Mac OS X

The configure script checks whether certain flags are required to use pthreads. But it did not consider that *none* might be needed (as is the case on Mac OS X). This lead to configure adding "-mt" to the list of flags (which does nothing on OS X except producing a warning). This in turn triggered

Re: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] git-submodule add: Add --local-branch option

Hi, On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 02:01:05PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > The v4 series leaves the remote branch amigious, but it helps you > point the local branch at the right hash so that future calls to > > $ git submodule foreach '

Re: Possible vulnerability to SHA-1 collisions

At 18:07 -0500 27 Nov 2012, Jeff King wrote: PS I also think the OP's "sockpuppet creates innocuous bugfix" above is easier said than done. We do not have SHA-1 collisions yet, but if the md5 attacks are any indication, the innocuous file will not be completely clean; it will need to have

Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] New remote-bzr remote helper

Felipe Contreras writes: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Felipe Contreras writes: >> >>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Felipe Contreras >>> wrote: This is a re-roll of the previous series to add support to fetch and push special modes, and refactor some

[RFH/Preview/PATCH] update "howto maintain git"

This is still incomplete without a documentation for two scripts, Meta/Reintegrate and Meta/cook (both are found on my 'todo' branch and meant to be checked out in the Meta subdirectory of git.git), that are meant to help the maintainer workflow but can be used by interested parties, but the old wr

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Junio C Hamano : >> fsck_ident() in fsck.c rejects anything but " [1-9][0-9]* " after >> the author and committer ident (i.e. the timestamp has to be >> integral number of seconds since the epoch, not before it, nor >> with fractional secon

[PATCH] Documentation/git-push.txt: clarify the "push from satellite" workflow

The context of the example to push into refs/remotes/satellite/ hierarchy of the other repository needs to be spelled out explicitly for the value of this example to be fully appreciated. Make it so. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- Brandon Casey writes: >> So refs are correct. The context is

Re: [PATCH v6 p2 3/9] transport-helper: trivial code shuffle

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> Just shuffle the die() part to make it more explicit, and cleanup the >> code-style. >> >> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras >> --- >> transport-helper.c | 7 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 delet

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

Shawn Pearce : > Well... if we added a fractional seconds to a commit, older versions > of Git will scream loudly and refuse to work with the new commit. That > would create a fork of Git. So much for that idea, I guess. Unless..I don't know how git's database representations work. Are they ve

Re: Why is this known by git but not by gitk

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:50 PM, Kevin O'Gorman wrote: > I just converted a SourceForge CVS repo to git using cvs2svn. One > directory in the result is named CVSROOT and everything would be fine, > but I wan to know why gitk does not see it. > > Git itself does not report it either, but it lets m

Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] New remote-bzr remote helper

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Felipe Contreras writes: >>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > This is a re-roll of the previous series to a

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Eric S. Raymond wrote: Shawn Pearce : Well... if we added a fractional seconds to a commit, older versions of Git will scream loudly and refuse to work with the new commit. That would create a fork of Git. So much for that idea, I guess. Unless..I don't know how git's da

Re: Millisecond precision in timestamps?

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Shawn Pearce : >> Well... if we added a fractional seconds to a commit, older versions >> of Git will scream loudly and refuse to work with the new commit. That >> would create a fork of Git. > > So much for that idea, I guess. > > Unless..

Re: Possible vulnerability to SHA-1 collisions

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 06:30:17PM -0500, Aaron Schrab wrote: > At 18:07 -0500 27 Nov 2012, Jeff King wrote: > >PS I also think the OP's "sockpuppet creates innocuous bugfix" above is > > easier said than done. We do not have SHA-1 collisions yet, but if > > the md5 attacks are any indication,

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] git-submodule init: Record submodule..branch in repository config.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:19:04AM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote: > Am 26.11.2012 22:00, schrieb W. Trevor King: > > From: "W. Trevor King" > > > > This allows users to override the .gitmodules value with a > > per-repository value. > > [snip problems]. You should use the branch setting from .git/c

Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] New remote-bzr remote helper

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 5:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Felipe Contreras writes: >>> On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > This is a re-roll of the previous series to a

Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 01:10:34AM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > While "constant traffic" probably overstates the issue, these are not > > theoretical problems. I recall at least three cases in the last year > > or so where Git has seen breakage with Solaris or Mac OS X because > > of sed or

  1   2   >