On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:34:34PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:13:25PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
It would matter almost exactly zero.
Some folks have explicit merge policies, and deciding how much
that matters is probably best
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 04:18:57PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:34:34PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:13:25PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
It would matter almost exactly zero
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 05:20:11PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
W. Trevor King wrote:
The 'git pull' (with 'none' mode) explainer just helps retrain folks
that are already using the current 'git pull' incorrectly.
If you are going to train them to use a configuration, it should
trying to motivate a way to slow/disable 'git pull', which I see
as orthogonal to your push to change the default configuration. I
thought describing my workflow in more detail would help clarify why…
W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 05:20:11PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
W
On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 02:44:02AM -0500, William Giokas wrote:
Maybe a time to use something like::
from mercurial import foo \
bar \
baz \
...
Would make that import into quite a few lines, but would help
.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/revisions.txt | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/revisions.txt b/Documentation/revisions.txt
index 5a286d0..0796118 100644
--- a/Documentation/revisions.txt
+++ b/Documentation
githooks(5) suggests:
Information about why the push is rejected may be sent to the user
by writing to standard error.
So follow that advice in the sample.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
templates/hooks--pre-push.sample | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion
And explain how it interacts with the scissors setting.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
The three-dash limit comes from f0658cf2 (restrict the patch
filtering, 2007-03-12), but I couldn't find any associated
documentation. Since the effect is so similar to the scissors line, I
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 01:23:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Here are the topics that have been cooking.
It looks like my boring git-mailinfo doc patch [1] fell through the
cracks here ;). Or maybe it's just cooking a bit longer before
getting queued?
Cheers,
Trevor
[1]: Gmane:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 02:12:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
If we are extending the documentation on ---, …
Ah, I see that the --- are actually mentioned already in the
DISCUSSION section of git-am(1) since 2499857b (git-am documentation:
describe what is taken from where, 2007-03-24). I
://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/id.html
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
The patch is based on the current maint branch.
Previous LOGNAME discussion:
* Michael Gruber on 2011-05-06 suggesting a discussing a whoami
fallback [1] (but whoami isn't POSIX
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 03:49:36PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I'll queue this as-is, but it makes me wonder if we want to do this
without if/then/fi, e.g.
: ${LOGNAME:=${USER:-$(id -u -n)}
I'm fine with that too.
Spelling everything out with if/then/fi is obviously at the other
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 06:39:56PM +0300, Dmitry Oksenchuk wrote:
We're in the middle of conversion of a large CVS repository (20
years, 70K commits, 1K branches, 10K tags) to Git and considering
two separate Git repositories: historical with CVS history and
working created without history
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 04:25:03PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Richard Hansen rhan...@bbn.com wrote:
Is it worthwhile to poke a lawyer about this as a precaution? (If so,
who?) Or do we wait for a motivating event?
I can poke the lawyer that was
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
I was recently confused when
$ git notes merge -v refs/remotes/origin/notes/commits
failed to do (or print) anything. It turns out that note refs must
live under 'refs/notes/', so my command line ref was expanding to
refs/notes/refs/remotes/origin
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Useful for debugging refs that don't seem to be expanding correctly.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-notes.txt | 6 +-
builtin/notes.c | 26 +-
t/t3301-notes.sh| 8
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This avoids surprising cases like:
$ GIT_NOTES_REF=refs/remotes/origin/notes/commits git notes get-ref --expand
refs/notes/refs/remotes/origin/notes/commits
With the old implementation, all note refs had to live under
'refs/notes/' which
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:58:37PM +0200, Johan Herland wrote:
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:48 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
If I'm missing a good reason to keep everything under
'refs/notes/', feel free to ignore the second patch.
This has been discussed a couple of times
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 10:23:54PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Really? Would git log --expand master be useful?
I'm clearly not an expert on this, but isn't that what
git show-ref master
is for? Or is the fact that show-ref returns hashes the more
important feature?
There was a lot of
I have a bunch of branches in my repo (a, b, c, …), and I'd like to
check them out into subdirectories of another branch (index). My
initial inclination was to use something like
$ git checkout index
$ git branch
a
b
c
* index
$ git submodule add -b a --reference ./ ./
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This removes a configuration step if you're trying to setup Ævar's
$ git submodule foreach 'git checkout $(git config --file
$toplevel/.gitmodules submodule.$name.branch) git pull'
workflow from
commit f030c96d8643fa0a1a9b2bd9c2f36a77721fb61f
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 08:37:14AM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
but cloning a remote repository (vs. checking out a local branch)
seems to be baked into the submodule implementation.
Perhaps --local would set submodule.$name.url to '.', and ome
combination of GIT_WORK_TREE, GIT_DIR, and object
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:16:22PM -0700, Nahor wrote:
On 2012-10-22 09:34, W. Trevor King wrote:
For instance, the module may later be updated to a commit in branch B
instead of branch A. Unless you remember to also update .gitmodule, you
have then inconsistent information.
But you're
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Use -b branch instead of -b branch. This brings the usage
strings in line with other options, e.g. --reference repository.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 2 +-
git-submodule.sh| 2 +-
2
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 03:44:36PM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:16:22PM -0700, Nahor wrote:
On 2012-10-22 09:34, W. Trevor King wrote:
For instance, the module may later be updated to a commit in branch B
instead of branch A. Unless you remember to also update
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:36:44PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Except recording the branch name might raise expectations about what git
will do with it. And as far as this patch goes, git won't do anything
with it (yet).
As Phil pointed out, doing anything with this variable is ambiguous:
On
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This option allows you to record a submodule.name.branch option in
.gitmodules. Git does not currently use this configuration option for
anything, but users have used it for several things, so it makes sense
to add some syntactic sugar for initializing
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:57:57PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 22.10.2012 14:37, schrieb W. Trevor King:
but cloning a remote repository (vs. checking out a local branch)
seems to be baked into the submodule implementation. Should I be
thinking about generalizing git-submodule.sh, or am
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
I still fail to see what adding that functionality to the submodule
command buys us (unless we also add code which really uses the branch
setting). What's wrong with doing a simple:
git config -f .gitmodules
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 06:03:53PM -0400, Phil Hord wrote:
Some projects now use the 'branch' config value to record the tracking
branch for the submodule. Some ascribe different meaning to the
configuration if the value is given vs. undefined. For example, see
the Gerrit
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 02:12:18PM -0400, Phil Hord wrote:
+ VAR_NAME=$(printf '%s'
$VAR_NAME | tr A-Z a-z | sed -e 's/^[^a-z]/_/' -e 's/[^a-z0-9]/_/g')
Is there a reason why you use printf instead of echo?
Also, this sort of name cleaning should probably
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 04:36:26AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:52:52PM -0700, sza...@google.com wrote:
diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
index ab6b110..dcceb43 100755
--- a/git-submodule.sh
+++ b/git-submodule.sh
@@ -270,7 +270,6 @@ cmd_add()
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 09:48:18PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 25.10.2012 02:53, schrieb W. Trevor King:
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote:
I still fail to see what adding that functionality to the submodule
command buys us (unless we also add code which really
pull'
$ git commit -a -m Updated submodules
$ git push
Ah, good, then we *are* all using the option for the same thing.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
I'm not clear on what that means, but they accept special values like
'.', so their usage
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 01:34:01AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 06:34:31PM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 02:59:33PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote:
Looks like the Gerrit meaning is basically the same as Ævar's. Gerrit
updates the parent project
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
The 3.x tree has been out for a while now. The -2.6 repository name
survived the initial release [1], but kernel.org now only lists
'linux.git' (for aegl as well as torvalds) [2].
[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1147422
On 2011-05-30 01
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
They've grown since d19fbc3 (Documentation: add git user's manual,
2007-01-07) when the stats were initially added. I've rounded
download sizes up to the nearest power of ten MiB to decrease the
precision and give a bit of growing room. Exact sizes
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Bring the docs back up to date with the real world ;). Patches are
against the current gitster/maint. The commit messages may be to
chatty, so let me know if you'd like a trimmed down version.
W. Trevor King (2):
Documentation: Update 'linux-2.6.git
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:05:50PM -0700, David Aguilar wrote:
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:55 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
-$ git clone --bare -l -s /pub/scm/.../torvalds/linux-2.6.git \
+$ git clone --bare -l -s /pub/scm/.../torvalds/linux.git \
/pub/scm/.../me/subsys-2.6
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:07:24AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
diff --git a/Documentation/git-clone.txt b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
index a0727d7..8e5260f 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-clone.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-clone.txt
@@ -274,7
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 09:55:22PM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
They've grown since d19fbc3 (Documentation: add git user's manual,
2007-01-07) when the stats were initially added. I've rounded
download sizes up to the nearest power of ten MiB to decrease the
precision and give a bit
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
There are other examples in git-clone.txt demonstrating both '--bare'
and '-l -s'.
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-clone.txt | 7 ---
1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-clone.txt b
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
There may be times when using one of your local repositories as a
reference for a new clone make sense, but the implied version-bump in
the old example isn't one of them. I think a more intuitive example
is multi-user system with a central reference clone
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
linux-nfs.org seems to have restructured their repository layout since
8391c60 (git-remote.txt: fix example url, 2007-11-02), and Bruce's
repo is now at git://git.linux-nfs.org/projects/bfields/linux.git.
Bruce also has a more richer internal branch structure
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
The 3.x tree has been out for a while now. The -2.6 repository name
survived the initial release [1], but kernel.org now only lists
'linux.git' (for aegl as well as torvalds) [2].
[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1147422
On 2011-05-30 01
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
David and Junio mentioned that I'd missed a few 2.6 references in my
initial pass. Here's a second attempt that does some deeper reworking
of the effected sections. Each deeper rewrite gets its own patch and
motivation, with the final patch making all
Assorted minor edits:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:48:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Because letting a trivial merge automatically handled by Git is so
Maybe:
Because letting Git handle a trivial merge automatically is so…
that the project s/he is interacting with may prefer rebase
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:48:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Because letting a trivial merge automatically handled by Git is so
easy with git pull, a person who is new to Git may not realize
that the project s/he is interacting with may prefer rebase
workflow.
Or they may not even realize
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 02:20:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Your accident user could have just been on a 'maint' branch,
[snip]
By the time I talk people into using a 'maint' branch, we'll probably
have already passed the 'accidental pull and push' stage ;). This
will certainly reduce the
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:16:53AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
IMHO, that would be terrible for beginners.
My experience with many beginners/students is: they run git pull to
get changes from their co-workers, don't read the messages.
I admit that I'd be happy with a config option that just
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 08:34:53AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:48:52PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Because letting a trivial merge automatically handled by Git is so
easy with git pull, a person who is new to Git may
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 01:52:38PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
I want the warning that they had not made the required config choice
between rebase/merge needed to handle a non-ff case, not the default
merge (or rebase) behavior. The warning gives them
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 10:46:23AM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
David and Junio mentioned that I'd missed a few 2.6 references in my
initial pass. Here's a second attempt that does some deeper
reworking of the effected sections.
No comments after a week, so I'm giving this patch series a bump
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 06:44:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 10:46:23AM -0400, W. Trevor King wrote:
David and Junio mentioned that I'd missed a few 2.6 references in my
initial pass. Here's a second attempt that does
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This option allows you to record a submodule.name.branch option in
.gitmodules. Git does not currently use this configuration option for
anything, but users have used it for several things, so it makes sense
to add some syntactic sugar for initializing
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 8
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt
index 9a99826..d4e993f 100644
--- a/Documentation
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Here's my revised patch. Changes from v2:
* Revised Ævar-vs-Gerrit usage to show agreement, following Shawn's
comments.
* Added a cleaned up version of Phil's $submodule_* export patch, with
docs and tests.
* Added a caveat to the -r/--record
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This makes it easy to access per-submodule variables. For example,
git submodule foreach 'git checkout $(git config --file $toplevel/.gitmodules
submodule.$name.branch) git pull'
can now be reduced to
git submodule foreach 'git checkout
On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:34:54PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
By remaining agnostic on the variable usage, this patch makes
submodule setup more convenient for all parties.
I personally do not think remaining agnostic on the usage is a
good
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 04:04:42PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 01:44:37PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
$ git submodule pull-branch
I think floating submodules is a misleading name for this feature
though, since the checkout SHA is explicitly specified. We're
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:31:30PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 02:20:27PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 04:30:07PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
(2) git diff [$path] and friends in the superproject compares the
HEAD of thecheckout
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 04:49:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
From what I have heard of projects using this: They usually still have
something that records the SHA1s on a regular basis. Thinking further,
why not record them in git? We could add
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 03:16:35AM -0800, nottrobin wrote:
Did any of this ever find its way into the submodule core? I'd like
to have a submodule that tracks a branch.
In progress. See:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/208254
Cheers,
Trevor
--
This email may be
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 09:39:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 04:49:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
...
I think it's best to have users craft their own commit messages
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:55:21PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:52:46AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
The superproject gitlink should only be updated after
$ git submodule update --pull
A plain
$ git
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:23:29AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 05:03:01PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
There is an important question still unanswered here for me: How does
the submodule get the configuration what the local branch tracks on the
remote side?
A good
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 11:23:29AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:55:21PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 11:52:46AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
The superproject gitlink should only be updated after
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This option allows you to record a submodule.name.branch option in
.gitmodules. Git does not currently use this configuration option for
anything, but users have used it for several things, so it makes sense
to add some syntactic sugar for initializing
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
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 existing --rebase/--merge workflows which already avoid
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
git-submodule.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
index 28eb4b1..f4a681c 100755
--- a/git-submodule.sh
+++ b/git-submodule.sh
@@ -640,7 +640,7 @@ Maybe you want to use 'update --init
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
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 wk...@tremily.us
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:54:02PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
We could add
$ git submodule update --branch
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 submodule
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 == $sha1, I
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:28:58AM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 02:01:05PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:31:25PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
The v4 series leaves the remote branch amigious, but it helps you
point the local branch at the right
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:42:05PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:28:58AM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
https://github.com/hvoigt/git/commits/hv/floating_submodules_draft
I looked over this before, but maybe not thoroughly enough ;).
Heiko pointed out that I likely
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:09:03AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
* A new 'submodule pull' for tracking the submodule's remote, which is
pulling --ff-only origin/$branch into a whatever state the submodule
is currently in. If any changes were made to submodule $shas,
optionally commit
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 3 ++-
git-submodule.sh| 2 +-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This allows you to easily record a submodule.name.branch option in
.gitmodules when you add a new submodule. With this patch,
$ git submodule add -b branch repository [path]
$ git config -f .gitmodules submodule.path.branch branch
reduces to
$ git
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:53:34AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
I thought of a better idea on the train. How about adding `--remote`
to `submodule update` that overrides the gitlinked SHA-1 with the
SHA-1 for origin/$branch? All of the other checkout
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:02:45AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us writes:
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
---
Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 3 ++-
git-submodule.sh| 2 +-
2
I'm not sure if this is the most recent patch iteration for this
feature, but I just saw this typo in `pu`.
On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 03:13:29AM +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote:
+# Commits are modified to preserve hg information and allow biridectionality.
This option triggers automatic commits when `submodule update` changes
any gitlinked submodule SHA-1s. The commit message contains a
`shortlog` summary of the changes for each changed submodule.
---
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:51:42PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote:
BTW, I am more and more convinced
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:12:16AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
+ test a = b
This kills the test (with --immediate) so you can look at the
generated commit. If you actually want the test to pass (e.g. if this
becomes a PATCH and not an RFC), this line should be removed.
--
This email may
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 11:12:16AM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
+ test $(git log -1 --oneline) = bbdbe2d Updated submodules:
submodule
s/bbdbe2d/cd69713/
I forgot to update the SHA-1 here after tweaking the commit message
format. I'd like to rewrite this test so it won't use the SHA-1
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:29:12PM -0500, Phil Hord wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:54 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
[snip initial thoughts leading to the update --remote v5]
I was thinking the same thing, but reading this whole thread a couple of
weeks late. Thanks
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:11:20PM -0500, Phil Hord wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:13 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:29:12PM -0500, Phil Hord wrote:
For that reason, I don't like the --pull switch since it implies a
fetch, but I will not always want
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 wk...@tremily.us
This allows users to override the .gitmodules value with a
per-repository value.
Your intentions makes lots of sense, but your patch does
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:53:09PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
Likewise for `submodule sync`, which seems to be
quite similar to `init`.
Ah, I'd remove the part of `sync` that touches the superproject's
.git/config, but keep the part that stores the superproject-reorded
URL in the submodule's
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 06:52:22PM -0500, Phil Hord wrote:
If I never 'submodule init' a submodule, it does not get visited by
'git submodule foreach', among others. I think some people use this
behavior explicitly.
This is something I'll fix while working up a trial patch. Currently
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 04:38:02PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 30.11.2012 18:53, schrieb W. Trevor King:
In my v5 patch, I check for submodule.name.remote first in the usual
`git config` files. If I don't find what I'm looking for I fall back
on .gitmodules (basically Jens' suggestion
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 04:56:02PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 01.12.2012 00:52, schrieb Phil Hord:
If I never 'submodule init' a submodule, it does not get visited by
'git submodule foreach', among others. I think some people use this
behavior explicitly.
On the other hand, I've
I'm currently stuck with adding a commit-less existing repository as a
submodule (which happens in t7400-submodule-basic.sh, ../bar/a/b/c
works with relative local path):
$ mkdir -p super/sub
$ cd super
$ git init
$ (cd sub git init)
$ git submodule add ./ sub
$ git status
# On
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 06:25:17PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 01.12.2012 17:30, schrieb W. Trevor King:
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 04:38:02PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
1) It tells the submodule commands that the user wants to have
that submodule populated (which is done in a subsequent
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 07:04:05PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Am 01.12.2012 18:49, schrieb W. Trevor King:
I think removing `init` will cause some compatibility issues anyway,
so I was re-imaging how you do it. I don't think update='none' and
don't populate my submodule are distinct ideas
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
This allows you to easily record a submodule.name.branch option in
.gitmodules when you add a new submodule. With this patch,
$ git submodule add -b branch repository [path]
$ git config -f .gitmodules submodule.path.branch branch
reduces to
$ git
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
The current `update` command incorporates the superproject's gitlinked
SHA-1 ($sha1) into the submodule HEAD ($subsha1). Depending on the
options you use, it may checkout $sha1, rebase the $subsha1 onto
$sha1, or merge $sha1 into $subsha1. This helps you
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:27:19PM -0500, W. Trevor King wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 08:11:20PM -0500, Phil Hord wrote:
I've always felt that the origin defaults are broken and are simply
being ignored because most users do not trip over them
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Several submodule configuration variables
(e.g. fetchRecurseSubmodules) are read from .gitmodules with local
overrides from the usual git config files. This shell function mimics
that logic to help initialize configuration variables in
git-submodule.sh
From: W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us
Don't force the user to clone from the tracked repository
(branch.name.remote) or `origin`. By setting
submodule.name.remote in .gitmodules or the usual git config files,
you can easily point a submodule at a different remote when using
`submodule update
101 - 200 of 311 matches
Mail list logo
