David Aguilar writes:
> Thanks Eric and Junio. I looked over the patches and they look good.
Are you sure about that? It seemed to me that it was breaking
everybody that is not on MacOS X --- did I misread the patch?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body
David Aguilar writes:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> So it is a right thing to do in that sense.
>>
>> I however am having this nagging feeling that I may be missing
>> something subtle here. Comments from others are very much welcome.
>
> Yes, this is correct. A
Kevin Bracey writes:
>>> I found myself thinking the same thing. It's really convenient being
>>> able to set your topic branch's upstream to another local branch, so
>
>> What is that "another local branch"? ... And if that is your workflow,
>> setting
>> push.default to "current" (and setting
"Philip Oakley" writes:
> From: "Junio C Hamano"
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch: add --allow-local option
>
> [...]
>
>> So when "the user" is running "git fetch" on "mywork" branch that
>> happens to be forked from a local "master", i.e. her configuration
Ramkumar Ramachandra writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Having said that I am not sure where your "not overly fond of" comes
>> from, as I do not see a problem with branch..push. The only
>> problem I may have with the approach would arise _only_ if we make
>> it the sole way to allow people pus
Felipe Contreras writes:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras writes:
>>
>>> This is irrelevant, it's an implementation detail of 'git pull'. *THE
>>> USER* is not running 'git fetch .'
>>
>> To those who fear running "git pull", the following has worked
Hi,
Sorry Amit, I assumed this patch made it to the list, but I just
realized it didn't; it doesn't allow HTML, and mails and silently
dropped (I hate that).
So I'm sending it so the list can see it:
It seems OK for me, but I would like to try it, and so far I haven't
managed to access Mercurial
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> When the user has an upstream branch configured to track a remote
> tracking branch:
>
> % git checkout --set-upstream-to github/master
>
> Doing a 'git fetch' without any arguments would try to fetch 'github',
> because it's configured
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Kevin Bracey wrote:
> On 17/05/2013 22:51, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> Kevin Bracey writes:
>>
>>> On 15/05/2013 23:34, Felipe Contreras wrote:
I think I'm using 'upstream' for something it was not intended to,
and
I think the current 'upstr
Great, I have gotten the concept now :)
My workaround for my problem is to rename the file to default and
then all will work out well :) Copy the file then and locally modify
it, but it will be in .gitignore so not tracked :)
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 18.05.
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
wrote:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>> I guess what I'm saying is: refspec semantics are inherent properties
>> of the remote, not of the local branch.
>
> [remote "ram"]
> push = refs/heads/link:refs/heads/for-junio/link
>
> is saying: if
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Having said that I am not sure where your "not overly fond of" comes
>> from, as I do not see a problem with branch..push. The only
>> problem I may have with the approach would arise _only_ if we make
>> it t
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> From: "Felipe Contreras"
> Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 3:23 PM
>>
>> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Philip Oakley
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: "Junio C Hamano"
>>> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:30 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch: add --
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> % git checkout --set-upstream-to master
>
> What is the problem you're trying to solve: why do you want an
> upstream set to master?
I have explained that multiple times already. I want all my branches
to
Am 18.05.2013 20:55, schrieb John Keeping:
> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 08:43:57PM +0200, Peter Lauri wrote:
>> But I just don't want to see that darn file. It is a config file that
>> I have changed, and I don't want to need to stash it for each "git
>> svn" action I want to perform... Any solution f
From: "Felipe Contreras"
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 3:23 PM
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Philip Oakley
wrote:
From: "Junio C Hamano"
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch: add --allow-local option
[...]
So when "the user" is running "git fetch" on "mywork
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> I guess what I'm saying is: refspec semantics are inherent properties
> of the remote, not of the local branch.
[remote "ram"]
push = refs/heads/link:refs/heads/for-junio/link
is saying: if the branch name matches "link", push it to for-junio/link.
[branch "link
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 08:43:57PM +0200, Peter Lauri wrote:
> But I just don't want to see that darn file. It is a config file that
> I have changed, and I don't want to need to stash it for each "git
> svn" action I want to perform... Any solution for that?
Read about --assume-unchanged in git-u
But I just don't want to see that darn file. It is a config file that
I have changed, and I don't want to need to stash it for each "git
svn" action I want to perform... Any solution for that?
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 8:41 PM, John Keeping wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 08:36:42PM +0200, Peter L
Felipe Contreras wrote:
> % git checkout --set-upstream-to master
What is the problem you're trying to solve: why do you want an
upstream set to master? Is it only because of rebase? We should
probably get rebase.defaultUpstream = @{u}|origin|...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the lin
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 08:36:42PM +0200, Peter Lauri wrote:
> Shouldn't this be valid? I would expect to NOT see the
> core/inc/config.inc.php in the "git status" output...
>
> Peters-MacBook-Air:dt-git plauri$ cat .gitignore
> .buildpath
> .project
> .settings/
> web/pjotr.php
> core/inc/config.
Shouldn't this be valid? I would expect to NOT see the
core/inc/config.inc.php in the "git status" output...
Peters-MacBook-Air:dt-git plauri$ cat .gitignore
.buildpath
.project
.settings/
web/pjotr.php
core/inc/config.inc.php
dt_error.log
process_wrapper.sh
Peters-MacBook-Air:dt-git plauri$ git
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Having said that I am not sure where your "not overly fond of" comes
> from, as I do not see a problem with branch..push. The only
> problem I may have with the approach would arise _only_ if we make
> it the sole way to allow people push to different names, forcing
> peopl
Kevin Bracey wrote:
> What I'll often be doing is creating a topic branch based on master or
> origin/master. (I would hardly ever be updating master or pushing to
> origin/master myself, so I probably should be just doing origin/master, but
> I tend to create a local master just to save typing on
Johannes Sixt writes:
> Am 18.05.2013 09:42, schrieb Andreas Leha:
>>> Am 14.05.2013 15:17, schrieb Andreas Leha:
Hi all,
how can I make git ignore the time stamp(s) in a PDF. Two PDFs that
differ only in these time stamps should be considered identical.
...
What I
Am 18.05.2013 09:42, schrieb Andreas Leha:
>> Am 14.05.2013 15:17, schrieb Andreas Leha:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> how can I make git ignore the time stamp(s) in a PDF. Two PDFs that
>>> differ only in these time stamps should be considered identical.
>>> ...
>>> What I tried is a filter:
>>> ,[ ~/.
Hello,
The man page of git-diff-index:
http://git-scm.com/docs/git-diff-index
states that
`git-diff-index - Compares content and mode of blobs between the index
and repository`.
However, in fact this command compares between files on disk and
repository by default. It's explained clearly in here:
On 17/05/2013 22:51, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kevin Bracey writes:
On 15/05/2013 23:34, Felipe Contreras wrote:
I think I'm using 'upstream' for something it was not intended to,
and
I think the current 'upstream' behavior should be split into
'upstream' and 'base'.
I found myself thinking
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> From: "Junio C Hamano"
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch: add --allow-local option
>
> [...]
>
>
>> So when "the user" is running "git fetch" on "mywork" branch that
>> happens to be forked from a local "m
From: "Junio C Hamano"
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 7:30 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fetch: add --allow-local option
[...]
So when "the user" is running "git fetch" on "mywork" branch that
happens to be forked from a local "master", i.e. her configuration
is set as
[branch "mywork"]
remo
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Felipe Contreras writes:
>
>> This is irrelevant, it's an implementation detail of 'git pull'. *THE
>> USER* is not running 'git fetch .'
>
> To those who fear running "git pull", the following has worked as a
> quick way to "preview" what
[+CC: Felipe, the author and maintainer of the script]
Samuel Chase wrote:
> I just used git-remote-hg to convert a small hg repository.
>
> It worked perfectly.
We'll be happy to address any deficiencies/ warts you find in everyday usage.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 6:46 AM, Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> contrib/related/git-related | 124
>
> 1 file changed, 124 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 contrib/related/git-related
I tried everything and I don't think it's physically possible to ma
For example '-1'.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 9 ++---
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 62c9b56..69737ac 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/r
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 14 ++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 8394cdc..62c9b56 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/related/git-related
@@ -232,6
For example master..feature-a.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 36 ++--
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index aec156e..8394cdc 100755
--- a/c
Instead of showing the authors and signers, show the commits themselves.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 22 ++
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index a2f98d9..aec156e 10
Not just the root one (of the project).
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 8 +++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 3b11930..def2af5 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-rel
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 35 +++
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index def2af5..a2f98d9 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 37 +
1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 9194777..3b11930 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/relate
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 13 +++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index cd1ef59..eef776a 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/related/git-re
Suggested-by: Duy Nguyen
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index eef776a..9194777 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/rel
Instead of showing the total involvement, show it per role: author, or
signer.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 18 +-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index d
100% means the person was involved in all the commits, in one way or the
other.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 8c26cf8..7be2829 100
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 80 +++--
1 file changed, 56 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 7be2829..df13148 100755
--- a
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 7 ++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 6f18cc8..8c26cf8 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/related/git-related
@@
This script find people that might be interested in a patch, by going
back through the history for each single hunk modified, and finding
people that reviewed, acknowledge, signed, or authored the code the
patch is modifying.
It does this by running 'git blame' incrementally on each hunk, and then
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras
---
contrib/related/git-related | 17 +
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related
index 4f31482..6f18cc8 100755
--- a/contrib/related/git-related
+++ b/contrib/related/git-related
@@ -3,
Hi,
Here goes version 5. I decided to start with a very very minimal working
version that is only 124 lines of code, then slowly but steadily introduce all
the fancy features. I also tweaked the defaults so they give more meaninful
results (IMO).
I also fixed the parsing of diffs so that it tackl
Hi Hannes,
thanks for taking this up and sorry for the long delay in my answer.
Johannes Sixt writes:
> Am 14.05.2013 15:17, schrieb Andreas Leha:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> how can I make git ignore the time stamp(s) in a PDF. Two PDFs that
>> differ only in these time stamps should be considered iden
50 matches
Mail list logo
