This is a preparation step for merging with append_signoff from
sequencer.c
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com
---
builtin/log.c | 13 +
log-tree.c| 21 +
revision.h| 2 +-
3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes:
diff --git a/t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh
b/t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh
index 6c01d0c..e401814 100755
--- a/t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh
+++ b/t/t4041-diff-submodule-option.sh
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2012, #07; Wed, 21)
--
Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with
'-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with
'+' are in 'next'.
Many topics have been merged to 'maint'
In some cases the user may want to send email with Cc: line with
email address we cannot extract. Now we allow user to extract
such email address for us.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Mazur krzys...@podlesie.net
---
git-send-email.perl | 9 ++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Hi everyone,
I sent this email yesterday to the git mailing list but I cannot find
it in any archive so I decide to send it again.
Does anyone know what has happened to the mailing list? I haven't
receive any email from several kernel related busy mailing lists for
several hours
Yichao Yu
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
* nd/unify-appending-of-s-o-b (2012-11-15) 1 commit
- Unify appending signoff in format-patch, commit and sequencer
I am not sure if the logic to refrain from adding a sign-off based
on the existing run of sign-offs
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Yichao Yu yyc1...@gmail.com wrote:
I sent this email yesterday to the git mailing list but I cannot find
it in any archive so I decide to send it again.
If it was HTML formatted it would have been silently dropped by the list.
Does anyone know what has
There is a discrepancy between the last line of `git diff --stat`
and `git diff --shortstat` in case of a merge.
The unmerged files are actually counted twice, thus doubling the
value of file changed.
In fact, while stat decrements number of files when seeing an unmerged
file, shortstat doesn't.
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes:
We don't need a bare 'server' and an intermediary 'public'. The repos
can talk to each other directly; that's what we want to exercise.
The previous patch to remove
I have completed work on git-weave (the tool I had called 'gitpacker' in some
previous postings). I want to submit a patch that integrates it into git;
in hopes of smoothing the process I have some technical and procedural
questions.
First, however, let me present the git-weave documentation
when trying 'M-x git-status' in a submodule created with recent (1.7.5+)
git, the command fails with
| ... is not a git working tree
This is caused by creating submodules with '--separate-git-dir' but
still checking for a working tree by testing for a '.git' directory.
The patch fixes this by
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Shawn Pearce spea...@spearce.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Yichao Yu yyc1...@gmail.com wrote:
US holiday today? The list traffic tends to be down during holidays.
This silent? 0 email from the kernel mailing list for 10+ hours?..
anyway
Hi Joao,
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Joao Vitor P. Moraes jvl...@gmail.com wrote:
Inside gitk there's a checkbox which says:
Ignore space change
It was translated to portuguese (pt-br) as:
Ignorar mudanças de caixa
But that message in portuguese means:
Ignore case changes
that
On 21.11.2012, at 06:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com writes:
Never mind that others have said that that's not the current interface
(I don't yet see why it would be a good interface after a transition,
but maybe it would be). Still, hopefully that clarifies the
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes:
It's way simpler. It exerceises the same features of remote helpers.
It's easy to read and understand. It doesn't depend on python.
It does _not_ exercise the python
Shawn Pearce spea...@spearce.org:
[Lots of helpful stuff ended by]
4. How does git help work? That is, how is a subcommand expected
to know when it is being called to export its help text?
IIRC git help foo runs man git-foo.
OK, that makes sense.
5. I don't see any extensions written
Doing a git rm submod/ on a submodule results in an error:
fatal: pathspec 'submod/' did not match any files
This is really inconvenient as e.g. using TAB completion in a shell on a
submodule automatically adds the trailing '/' when it completes the path
of the submodule directory. The
We used to warn about invalid emails and just drop them. Such warnings
can be unnoticed by user or noticed after sending email when we are not
giving the final sanity check [Y/n]?
Now we quit by default.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Mazur krzys...@podlesie.net
Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano
Some addresses are passed twice to unique_email_list() and invalid addresses
may be reported twice per send_message. Now we warn about them earlier
and we also remove invalid addresses.
This also removes using of undefined values for string comparison
for invalid addresses in cc list processing.
Hi everyone,
I want to build packages for snap shoot of different branches from
different remote git repositories in the same local directory (so that
I don't need to recompile everything everytime.) and I am using a
combination of `git clone/checkout/reset/fetch` to do that. However,
during
On 11/08/2012 04:38 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote:
On 11/08/2012 12:39 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
But in addition to that we have our own custom E-Mail notification
scripts for:
* People can subscribe
In the fallback check, used when Email::Valid is not available, the
extract_valid_address() uses $1 without checking for success of matching
regex. The $1 variable may still hold the result of previous match,
which is the address when email address was in '' or be undefined
otherwise.
Now if
Hi,
I still think that it would make the most sense to do the following
(if you insist on some sort of automated repair):
(1) Fetch a good clone (or clones) into a temporary directory;
(2) Cannibalize the objects from it (them);
(3) Re-run git fsck and check for still-missing / unreachable
On 23 November 2012 05:39, Yichao Yu yyc1...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I sent this email yesterday to the git mailing list but I cannot find
it in any archive so I decide to send it again.
Does anyone know what has happened to the mailing list? I haven't
receive any email from several
Incorporated Junio's feedback. Also, I broke the last patch of the
previous series out into three to make the changes more clear.
This patch set can be divided into two sets:
1. Provide useful advice for rejected tag references.
push: return reject reasons via a mask
push: add
Pass all rejection reasons back from transport_push(). The logic is
simpler and more flexible with regard to providing useful feedback.
Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick ch...@rorvick.com
---
builtin/push.c | 13 -
builtin/send-pack.c | 4 ++--
transport.c | 17
Advising the user to fetch and merge only makes sense if the rejected
reference is a branch. If none of the rejections are for branches, just
tell the user the reference already exists.
Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick ch...@rorvick.com
---
builtin/push.c | 11 +++
cache.h| 1 +
If the reference exists on the remote and the update is not a delete,
then mark as an update. This is in preparation for handling tags and
branches differently when pushing.
Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick ch...@rorvick.com
---
cache.h | 1 +
remote.c | 18 +++---
2 files changed, 12
Add a flag for indicating an update to a reference requires force.
Currently the nonfastforward flag of a ref is used for this when
generating status the status message. A separate flag insulates the
status logic from the details of set_ref_status_for_push().
Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick
References are allowed to update from one commit-ish to another if the
former is an ancestor of the latter. This behavior is oriented to
branches which are expected to move with commits. Tag references are
expected to be static in a repository, though, thus an update to
something under
Do not allow fast-forwarding of references that point to a tag object.
This keeps the behavior consistent with lightweight tags. Additionally,
allowing the reference to update could leave the old object dangling.
Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick ch...@rorvick.com
---
Documentation/git-push.txt | 10
Pushes must already (by default) update to a commit-ish due the fast-
forward check in set_ref_status_for_push(). But rejecting for not being
a fast-forward suggests the situation can be resolved with a merge.
Flag these updates (i.e., to a blob or a tree) as not forwardable so the
user is
Links of London in July 2006 was famous jewellery, watch and deserve to act
the role of brand Folli Follie group acquisition. In August 2007, Andrew
Marshall appointed executive director, Links of London. A parent company
Folli Follie group support as a solid
---
gitk-git/gitk | 154
++
1 file changed, 154 insertions(+)
diff --git a/gitk-git/gitk b/gitk-git/gitk
index 17ba10a..12a7139 100755
--- a/gitk-git/gitk
+++ b/gitk-git/gitk
@@ -1981,6 +1981,7 @@ proc makewindow {} {
global
Dear l10n team members,
New git.pot is generated from v1.8.0-273-g2d242 in the master branch.
l10n: Update git.pot (14 new, 3 removed messages)
Generate po/git.pot from v1.8.0-273-g2d242, and there are 14 new and 3
removed messages.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin
There is a discrepancy between the last line of `git diff --stat`
and `git diff --shortstat` in case of a merge.
The unmerged files are actually counted twice, thus doubling the
value of file changed.
In fact, while stat decrements number of files when seeing an unmerged
file, shortstat doesn't.
36 matches
Mail list logo
