On 2017-01-16, at 10:25 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> You are right about the historical perspective.
>
> However the `Worktrees` is a new feature.
>
> So yes, you can now have the different branches checked out in differemt
> trees, and other go
Background: I'm doing maintenance work on a project called "Realistic Fluids
Overhaul". The original for this was at
https://bitbucket.org/4HeadTiger/minecraft-finite-fluids ; my current version
is at https://github.com/keybounce/Finite-Fluids
This is a forge mod for minecraft; as far as this q
On the question of "Should .gitignore be in git":
Today, I had to try to work with someone else's repository, and merge it into
my stuff.
And, in the process, I realized that there are two types of files I don't want
git to pay attention to.
One is output files -- things that are generated du
On 2017-01-19, at 1:39 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Michael,
>
> There should be no problem..
>
> First you / Git can host multiple independent branches / lines of development
> -- see 'orphan' branches.
>
> Second, You say one was forked from the other so
Thank you.
On 2017-01-19, at 10:49 PM, Konstantin Khomoutov
wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 12:36:13 -0800
> Michael wrote:
>
> [...]
>> Does it make sense to let git have two different gitignore files, so
>> that one can be tracked, and the other not? Or am I doing s
I'm trying to find something that did not get committed into master.
I'm working on a mod for minecraft. At some point in the past, on one of the
branches, I made a change to replace tests for Blocks.AIR (a constant referring
to a single block) with block.isAir() (a method call to ask blocks if
>...
>
> git log -SisAir --branches ^offending_commit
>
> should do the trick.
>
> It says «find all commits reachable from all branches but
> excluding the commits also reachable from offending_commit, whose
> changesets have a string containing "isAir" added or deleted».
> ...
WOW.
Ok, up u
On 2017-01-23, at 2:38 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov
wrote:
> ...
>
> In particular, refer to:
>
> * the `git log` manual for the description of the
> "-Sstring" command-line option (the mode it enables is called
> "pickaxe"; see also "--pickaxe-regex" and "--pickage-all" modifiers to
> it, and
What command, or gui tool, will let me check one file's diffs over time?
i.e.: Lets say I want to see what happened to one file, only, from commit X to
the present.
Then, as a GUI tool, being able to look through the list/tree of files, and see
all the commits (and their locations in the commit
So those crazy cascading style sheets that are a to edit with Stylish are
actually compiled from something else that is human read/edit-able?
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I thought they were just spat out by some
program that did layout.
On 2017-01-25, at 3:59 AM, Nelson Efrain A.
On 2017-01-26, at 1:12 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
>
> Is the project well modularised with no file >100 lines (excepting, maybe,
> well developed libraries that never change),
100 lines per file??
You're joking, right? That's one of those "in theory" things, right?
First, while I might be able
> Have you looked at git-imerge?
Imerge looks like a really nice tool. How stable/sufficient is it? Why is it
not part of the normal git distribution?
I noticed that it was still getting dev work this month, and in the last two
years a bunch of people forked copies of it, and made their own li
On 2017-01-27, at 12:57 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
>
> It doesn't happen at my work, but one has to ask how / why have we dug the
> hole so deep and wide that this gross merge conflict continues to repeat it
> self as a regular corporate activity, and then how to get out of here/there
> (and so
so would overwrite my local changes.
Here's the offending block after the merge:
keybounceMBP:Finite-Fluids michael$ git checkout -b cleanup develop
error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by
checkout:
src/main/java/com/mcfht/realisticfluids/FluidData
So since my attempt to switch branches with the "merge" flag (-m) gave me an
error, I thought I'd try to go back.
keybounceMBP:Finite-Fluids michael$ git merge --abort
fatal: There is no merge to abort (MERGE_HEAD missing).
keybounceMBP:Finite-Fluids michael$ git status
On
On 2017-01-29, at 11:32 PM, Konstantin Khomoutov
wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:07:34 -0800
> Michael wrote:
>
>> So since my attempt to switch branches with the "merge" flag (-m)
>> gave me an error, I thought I'd try to go back.
>>
>> keybo
he diff.
To clarify #2: The three versions in the conflict file were "nothing" (the old
develop that had none of these changes), "what was checked in" (the feature
branch), and "everything"; what I wanted was "everything - what was checked in"
(whi
On 2017-02-07, at 9:47 AM, Hugh Gleaves wrote:
> This is extremely promising:
>
> https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudioalm/2017/02/03/announcing-gvfs-git-virtual-file-system/
... I detect a sense of humor: "repos of unusual size!",
"For example, the Windows codebase has over 3.5 milli
On 2017-02-09, at 5:36 PM, Stephen Morton wrote:
> On Thursday, 9 February 2017 17:31:38 UTC-5, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> There is another approach to merging, that is the 'imerge' tool [1], which
> does consider every commit on both sides of the merge.
>
> It was developed for
On 2017-02-13, at 8:17 PM, adam_sher...@flightcentre.com wrote:
>
> Another dev has made some changes that I wish to have on my local repo
> (checkout?) as some future work requires his files. In fact, I thought, I may
> as well update my local version of the site by grabbing all the updates th
I need help with the syntax of rebase.
I have a branch, "Dish", that was branched off of master. This was about a
month ago.
Making a new branch off master, and merging Dish into it, worked just fine. No
problem.
Now, I have "master", and from it, "merged-dish".
Time to update master. All goo
On 2017-03-24, at 6:08 PM, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 10:10:02 PM UTC+1, Michael Gersten wrote:
> I need help with the syntax of rebase.
>
> I have a branch, "Dish", that was branched off of master. This was about a
On 2017-04-03, at 11:44 AM, bestbrightestandthens...@gmail.com wrote:
> I just need some sort of tutorial. I will see what I can find on youtube.
> It's a rather odd product compared to other source safe systems I have used
> in the past. The Microsoft systems I can figure out in 5 minutes with
On 2017-04-03, at 8:18 PM, bestbrightestandthens...@gmail.com wrote:
> The .gitignore file doesn't result in anything being ignored. It's still
> looking at these .gif files, not only that buy jquery library files too. I
> can't even create a branch since all I get are these needs merge errors.
On 2017-04-03, at 8:19 PM, bestbrightestandthens...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've tried adding to the .gitignore file but I can't seem to get git to
> ignore anything.
What did you put in the .gitignore file? Can you send a copy of it?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
On 2017-04-04, at 6:32 PM, bestbrightestandthens...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have two directories. The one called bitbucket/source contains the cloned
> repository which was set up by another developer and the other one is called
> bitbucket/sourcecode which contains the same from my localhost so s
On 2017-03-25, at 5:38 PM, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Having some more time now, here`s a bit more elaborate answer, mentioning the
> rebasing flow, if you prefer that instead.
>
> On Saturday, March 25, 2017 at 2:22:09 AM UTC+1, Michael Gersten wrote:
>
ts to test and play with, and I was told
to add this line:
fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*
Which worked -- I was able to say
843 git fetch origin refs/pull/12121/head
No problem.
What was the problem? Doing an update.
keybounceMBP:youtube-dl michael$ git pull master
Thank you very much.
> Where did you "explicitly ask for pull request 12121" remote tracking branch,
> in order for it to be shown here? I haven`t seen that command in your e-mail,
> so unless you accidentally omitted it, you didn`t actually ask for it... yet.
When I said
> 843 git fetch ori
This sounds like you need "iMerge". Incremental merge -- basically, every
small, tiny diff is made, so that all conflicts are tiny.
Doesn't mean that they all are easy. If you've ever had one change made in
multiple small commits, then things can still be difficult.
On 2017-04-30, at 6:47 AM, m
On 2017-05-02, at 10:22 AM, m...@jump-ing.de wrote:
>
> As nobody knew an answer, so I started trying rebase strategies (-s, -X
> options), one by one. Using 'git rebase -s recursive -X ours ...' was the
> only one which did something useful for this self-rebase and also worked with
> a mange
On 2017-05-02, at 10:30 AM, Michael wrote:
>
> On 2017-05-02, at 10:22 AM, m...@jump-ing.de wrote:
>
>>
>> As nobody knew an answer, so I started trying rebase strategies (-s, -X
>> options), one by one. Using 'git rebase -s recursive -X ours ...' was
On 2017-05-02, at 12:47 PM, m...@jump-ing.de wrote:
>
>
> > The Mikado method [2] is one approach to avoiding a merge hell of trying to
> > do everything at once.
>
> Here's another method I use for several years already, with great success:
> https://github.com/Traumflug/Teacup_Firmware/iss
On 2017-05-05, at 11:47 AM, Markus Hitter wrote:
> Am 05.05.2017 um 19:43 schrieb Michael:
>> I read as much as I could about the Mikado method, and it turned out that
>> all the basics of the method are available, either in their website, or
>> their sample chapters,
Let me see if I understand this correctly.
You want two things that differ from a common master by a few private commits,
such as
Master = A, B, C, D, I, J, K, L, M
branch A = E, H, plus master
branch B = F, G, plus master
Did I understand that correctly?
If so, I think that either doing merge
On 2017-05-16, at 1:36 PM, matevz.lan...@borea.si wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> that would work normally, however we have a problem that we can not keep
> common master and we need to split the master to A and B. The base code
> changes are huge and there is no way for us to eve
AHH...
So what you want is a new, orphaned branch of changes, and you want to merge
that new branch into both A and B. Correct?
I'll let someone that knows how to set that up chime in.
On 2017-05-17, at 6:33 AM, matevz.lan...@borea.si wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> You have a common source "master".
> Y
On 2017-05-17, at 8:35 AM, matevz.lan...@borea.si wrote:
> Hi,
>
> orphaned branch would work, but is very inconvenient for the process we have.
>
> we would like for some people to work on A and commit patches to A.
> other people to work on B and commit patches on B.
>
> Once a week we would
Then I think it should be possible.
Just need to know how to tell merge to only look at changes from "start of A's
mergeable's changes to tip of A".
And I don't know that.
Or:
Should be possible
Limit merging to a range
How do you do that?
(Haiku because ... haiku)
On 2017-05-17, at 8:54 AM, Ma
On Friday, May 26, 2017 at 6:17:43 PM UTC-4, Robert Glover wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm a new git user, and I am trying to clone a bare repository and having
> difficulty making/pushing changes in the main/cloned repository. I believe
> that I created the repository correctly under:
>
You don't act
On 2017-06-05, at 4:39 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi, yes it can be awkward when different systems make different choices about
> which feature they want to use as the indicator for what they really want to
> look at. For git the sha1 object id (oid) is what tells you that it has
> changed. I
On 2017-06-06, at 7:31 PM, Maurizio Vitale wrote:
> Everybody else manage without restoring the timestamps, so it would be
> probably easier if you described what you want to achieve.
Here's the problem: Just because people "manage" without a feature doesn't mean
the feature is wanted.
Heck,
So I did a merge, edited the conflicts, and committed the result. Looking over
the commit, I saw that I missed a conflict marker.
No bigger. "git reset head^", fix it up, and re-commit, right?
No, for some reason, that wants to commit a normal commit, not a merge commit.
The second parent is mis
On 2017-07-21, at 10:09 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:23:12AM -0700, DynV Montrealer wrote:
>
>> I'd like to delete revision 2 & 5 on
>> http://gist.github.com/WilliamCQ/4d734bf3e7c3ab59b08c949f1ab673d7 and have
>> no idea how to proceed by command line and the
On 2017-07-20, at 4:11 PM, Jon Erickson wrote:
> To start, the user that generated this error was advised to backout the
> resulting munge and use a standard merge to fix his problems. Following
> standard merging practices fixed his problems but his original approach had
> been nagging at m
On 2017-07-20, at 4:11 PM, Jon Erickson wrote:
> To start, the user that generated this error was advised to backout the
> resulting munge and use a standard merge to fix his problems. Following
> standard merging practices fixed his problems but his original approach had
> been nagging at m
On 2017-07-25, at 5:38 AM, JNickVA wrote:
> I have recently been put in charge of a code repository that contains a
> MASTER and several branches. My task is to try to merge the root and the top
> two most frequently used branches into a new repository. I face two problems:
> the branches hav
On 2017-08-05, at 9:26 PM, G. Sylvie Davies wrote:
>
> # get most recent annotated tag (by time-of-tagging)
> $ git for-each-ref --sort='-*committerdate' refs/tags | head --lines=1
>
> # get most recent lightweight tag (by time-of-commit)
> $ git for-each-ref --sort='-committerdate' refs/ta
I'm looking for how to add a pull request, based off a newer master, to my
master.
The specifics: I'm trying to work with OBS 18.0.2 (version 19 won't run on my
older OS). I'm trying to add in a pull request (979,
https://github.com/jp9000/obs-studio/pull/979 ) to my build.
That pull request i
On 2017-08-08, at 1:27 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> sounds like you need (one way of viewing the steps required) to rebase the
> old series "take the total deltas " and apply that to a new branch taken from
> 'current branch (LocalMaster)'.
tudio michael$ git checkout -b Pull979
Switched to a new branch 'Pull979'
keybounceMBP:obs-studio michael$ git rebase --onto head origin/master
origin/pr/979
First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...
keybounceMBP:obs-studio michael$
Nope, it did not apply anything to my cur
tudio michael$ git checkout -b Pull979
Switched to a new branch 'Pull979'
keybounceMBP:obs-studio michael$ git rebase --onto head origin/master
origin/pr/979
First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...
keybounceMBP:obs-studio michael$
Nope, it did not apply anything to my cur
On 2017-08-09, at 12:28 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> [don't abuse the fact that 'head' on windows will find the HEAD pseudoref
> file, as there are a few cases where it fails - there's been mention recently
> on the Git List in the last w
On 2017-08-12, at 12:50 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Michael,
>
> If that master and the PR979 branches have been merged and both tips are now
> ahead of the merge point, then git itself has no way of deciding which side
> of the merge is which. [you hadn't labelled your d
You might try 'imerge'.
Git-imerge basically can construct a rebase, and it actually looks at all the
commits along the way, rather than only the heads and merge-base.
On 2017-08-28, at 3:28 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 11:26:06AM +0300, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
>> On Sat
On 2017-08-30, at 1:30 AM, Prasanth Damodharan
wrote:
> I am facing below merge issue while using Git. Please let me know if you have
> suggestions on how to resolve it
>
> 1. Feature branch (DEV_FEATURE1) got merged to master branch by mistake and
> changes were reverted from master
> 2. DE
any other
documentation that would lead me to believe otherwise, but I just wanted to
double check.
All repo names and hashes are fictitious.
Thanks!
Best,
Michael Powell
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" group.
So I'm trying to pretty up some commit id's with a simple mining script. (Yea,
I know, but I figure 5K sha tests isn't that bad).
Here's my initial branch
keybounceMBP:paperclips michael$ git branch -lv
FrankV3 1f47df5 initial
* Interface 1f47df5 initial
master1f4
So apparently, git doesn't want to refer to a sha unless you give at least 4
hex digits.
Is there an option to turn it down to 3?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" g
So apparently, git doesn't want to refer to a sha unless you give at least 4
hex digits.
Is there an option to turn it down to 3?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" g
How do I get git diff to show me the difference between two different versions
of one file?
I can say git diff tree-1 tree-2
I can say git diff file1
How do I ask for file1 in tree-1 versus file1 in tree-2?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this m
On 2017-10-31, at 7:53 PM, Michael wrote:
> How do I get git diff to show me the difference between two different
> versions of one file?
>
> I can say git diff tree-1 tree-2
>
> I can say git diff file1
>
> How do I ask for file1 in tree-1 versus file1 in tree-
> So supposedly you'd need
>
> $ git diff :2:adobepass.py :3:adobepass.py
Thank you!
Would you believe I tried abodepass.py:1, and 1: adobepass.py, but did not
realize that I needed :x: prefix?
(I also thought that "0" was the common, and "1" and "2" were the two sides.)
===
Next question,
> So supposedly you'd need
>
> $ git diff :2:adobepass.py :3:adobepass.py
Thank you!
Would you believe I tried abodepass.py:1, and 1: adobepass.py, but did not
realize that I needed :x: prefix?
(I also thought that "0" was the common, and "1" and "2" were the two sides.)
===
Next question,
> So supposedly you'd need
>
> $ git diff :2:adobepass.py :3:adobepass.py
Thank you!
Would you believe I tried abodepass.py:1, and 1: adobepass.py, but did not
realize that I needed :x: prefix?
(I also thought that "0" was the common, and "1" and "2" were the two sides.)
===
Next question,
Hmm...
My first thought: (Warning: This is more of a "what you should do next", not a
"how to solve this now"):
Git has no problem with file renames. So if a given block of text, or chapter,
was its own file, then git would only show changes in the block rather than
re-orders.
But then, you'd
Is there a way to get a partial repository, such as
https://github.com/gnustep/gap/tree/master/user-apps/FlexiSheet
without getting every app there?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
f
ntials, etc, are all
resolved as localhost (for instance) and/or configured in the user's global
Git config.
The folks with npm and/or npmjs.com are not especially responsive on the
topic, much less helpful.
Regards,
Michael Powell
https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/install
https://github.com/npm/npm
On 2018-02-21, at 6:28 AM, Duane Knesek wrote:
> However, I am intrigued by Google's use of a mono-repository.
What makes the mono-repository work is the toolsets that Google and Microsoft
use. To my knowledge, none of these tools have been released; they are
considered company secrets.
Re
On 2018-03-12, at 4:11 AM, Frank Röhm wrote:
> Hallo
>
> sometimes it happens to me, that I clone a repo from my github account and do
> some little but unnecessary changes, just to play a bit.
> I want to discard them all now and surely I don't want to do any merge. I
> just want to reset
On 2018-04-03, at 3:08 PM, KrzyJaski wrote:
> After
> git status
>
> I got this message:
> Changes to be committed:
> (use "git reset HEAD ..." to unstage)
>
> modified: root/node/chnode.c
> modified: root/node/node.c
>
> Changes not staged for commit:
> (use "git add ..." to
A few years ago (2009), the idea was put forward that some parents in a merge
should be marked as "historical", or "uninteresting", and not displayed by
default
(http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/2009/08/rebase-with-history-implementation.html)
Does git currently have any support for this?
---
f git with a small local patch. But
I can't even fetch the upstream. What am I doing wrong? Help please.
keybounceMBP:git michael$ git pull
warning: redirecting to https://github.com/Keybounce/git.git/
Already up to date.
keybounceMBP:git michael$ git fetch
warning: redirecting to https://
I cannot believe how long I missed this:
> upsream https://github.com/git/git.git (fetch)
> upsream https://github.com/git/git.git (push)
A spelling error.
On 2018-06-15, at 12:41 PM, Michael wrote:
> I am having trouble getting my remotes configured correctly. Basically, I
>
How do I do a rebase in git gui?
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to git-user
> - version: doesn't make sense in git, would it be the hash? what does
> that tell me?
"Version" is not a git-native concept.
Semantic versioning is an end-developer convention, not a "text history
tracking tool" issue.
https://semver.org/
Note that items 9 and 10 in that list permit in
On 2018-09-27, at 5:06 PM, B. Lachele Foley wrote:
> I knew that a git-pull is a fetch followed by a merge. But, I had not seen
> arguments for always splitting the process up. For newbies, I always
> considered 'git pull' to be simpler when getting them up to speed. In this
> case, you ar
On 2018-09-28, at 12:03 PM, B. Lachele Foley wrote:
> We talked about this at group meeting this morning. We had just been
> discussing a realization similar to Michael Gersten's observation about
> needing a "special merge" when we saw his post come in. Momen
not the same as the "gh-pages" branch of my upstream. And renaming
isn't an option.
So, what's the syntax for dealing with (for example)
keybounceMBP:AutoTrimps michael$ git remote -v
origin https://github.com/keybounce/AutoTrimps (fetch)
origin https://github.
I think that I am using git incorrectly. What I want to do is way too hard.
I have forked someone's repository from GitHub.
I had to make some initial changes to URLs to be able to run my version.
I made changes that consist of code change, and a change log change.
First issue: I want to make a p
anges, maintaining
my own "current", and keeping a readable history. Git for Windows, as I
understand it, does straight rebasing and losing all history of patches; there
has (?) to be better? right? imerge's "rebase with history" -- did anything
ever come from that?
>
On 2018-11-23, at 3:24 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
>
> On 23/11/2018 01:29, Michael wrote:
>> On 2018-11-22, at 2:49 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
>>
>>> if it is just URL replacement then consider a smudge/clean filter so that
>>> the worktree (local checked ou
How about one of these:
refish
shaish
commitish
treeish
Actually, "treeish" or commitish might be best -- you want to specify the state
of a directory tree, and you are probably using something that identifies a
commit, which identifies a tree plus a message.
On 2018-11-26, at 7:20 AM, Philip
documents, is there a way where I can
update my fork from the master with showing me possible conflicts?
I.e. in case I already altered a file locally and/or my online fork while
somebody else also worked on the same document.
Thanks, Michael.
--
You received this message because you are subscri
loned repo?
Thanks...
Regards,
Michael
--
loned repo?
Thanks...
Regards,
Michael
--
John,
Sounds similar to a scenario I want to consider: promote local Git branch
to remote (SSH) bare repository. In other words, your post benefits
community. It's helpful. Thank you...
Regards,
Michael
On Friday, December 7, 2012 10:29:29 AM UTC-6, John McKown wrote:
>
> Idiot
Closest comparison I can think of is svn in which mv or rename is also
problematic. Remember; this is version control, with history and diff viewer.
If you want file sync look into dropbox or Google drive. Hth.
--
r Svn, I'm reading also for Mercurial (Hg), along these lines.
Is there anything comparable for Git that I can pull from NuGet or some
other source?
Regards,
Michael
--
?
Any advice? Thank you...
Regards,
Michael Powell
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git
for human beings" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
ded
board-support-package repo, so once it's set, that's it. I am tasked to
review the history and identify a somewhat sane version to tag it with. If
necessary may need to inject earlier versions, but hopefully that won't be
necessary.
Thank you...
Regards,
Michael Powell
--
???
Hold on -- are you thinking "CVS" like the pharmacy chain? This is "Concurrent
versioning system", a way to track the history of a group of documents
(typically the files used to compile a program, but it does not have to be)
when they can be changed by multiple people at a time.
On 2018-
iscussing version
control systems. And for you to say that you want your data entered illegally
into a pharmacy is ...
Well, ok, maybe you are a troll. I'll stop feeding you now.
>
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2018, 10:13 PM Michael ???
>
> Hold on -- are you thinking "CVS" like
Is there a way to say "Only add files already known to git"?
Like a "git add -only-known"?
The idea is to update existing files, without adding new files.
---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
thank you!
On 2019-05-15, at 3:01 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> On 15/05/2019 15:59, Michael wrote:
>> Is there a way to say "Only add files already known to git"?
>>
>> Like a "git add -only-known"?
>>
>> The idea is to update existing files,
On 2019-05-16, at 11:35 AM, Giorgio Forti wrote:
> If I commit ONE file Git builds a "zip" that contains the actual situation of
> ALL the 6 thousand of files in my C# solution?
> And if I check out this commithe file Git gives me back the complete
> situation at that moment?
> This would be
On 2019-06-12, at 1:51 PM, Philip Oakley wrote:
> Hi Madhu,
>
> Git is designed as a unix/linux application, so by default it is a programme
> that does a single requested action and exits. It does not 'hang around'. The
> latter is a more 'Windows'/GUI style of operation.
There are a lot o
> Hi Michael,
>
> I was probably being over zealous in my differentiation.
>
> Git tends to follow the 'terminal command line interface' approach, which
> (because of a single terminal view) would lead to the distinction I
> highlighted, but that doesn'
On 2019-11-01, at 12:39 PM, likejudo wrote:
> I was wondering if this isn't space inefficient - and how does it become
> superior to a VCS by storing snapshots rather than deltas?
Some people will cite studies showing that the pack files have better
compression than you'd normally expect; this
On 2019-11-03, at 8:28 AM, Philip Oakley wrote:
>> But you still need to control what gets merged into mainline or master,
>> right?
>>
> If you change the management viewpoint from "control" (with all its baggage)
> to "select" then it's a bit easier to see that the managers task got that b
101 - 200 of 368 matches
Mail list logo
