Jeff King writes:
> So the greater question is not "should this output be marked" but
> "should auto-gc data go over the sideband so that all clients see it
> (and any server-side stderr does not)". And I think the answer is
> probably yes. And that fixes the "remote: " thing as a
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:14:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > What exactly are you referring to (you only quoted the introduction)?
> > Do you think we should fix the git-gc issue but keep the general
> > behavior of printing messages unaltered? Do you think it would be
> > worthwhile to
On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 01:14:02PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> > On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 at 21:33:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> Lukas Fleischer writes:
> >>
> >> > When running `git push`, it might
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 at 21:33:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Lukas Fleischer writes:
>>
>> > When running `git push`, it might occur that error messages are
>> > transferred from the server to the
On Thu, 02 Jun 2016 at 21:33:33, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Lukas Fleischer writes:
>
> > When running `git push`, it might occur that error messages are
> > transferred from the server to the client. While most messages (those
> > explicitly sent on sideband 2) are prefixed
Lukas Fleischer writes:
> When running `git push`, it might occur that error messages are
> transferred from the server to the client. While most messages (those
> explicitly sent on sideband 2) are prefixed with "remote:", it seems
> that error messages printed during the
When running `git push`, it might occur that error messages are
transferred from the server to the client. While most messages (those
explicitly sent on sideband 2) are prefixed with "remote:", it seems
that error messages printed during the automatic householding performed
by git-gc(1) are
7 matches
Mail list logo