Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2013, #09; Wed, 29)

2013-05-31 Thread Øystein Walle
Junio C Hamano gitster at pobox.com writes: * kb/status-ignored-optim-2 (2013-05-29) 1 commit - dir.c: fix ignore processing within not-ignored directories Fix 1.8.3 regressions in the .gitignore path exclusion logic. Hi, I see that the Tested-by line in kb/status-ignored-optim-2

Re: [PATCH 2/2] lookup_commit_reference_gently: do not read non-{tag,commit}

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Thomas Rast wrote: diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c index 888e02a..00e8d4a 100644 --- a/commit.c +++ b/commit.c @@ -31,8 +31,12 @@ static struct commit *check_commit(struct object *obj, struct commit *lookup_commit_reference_gently(const unsigned char *sha1,

[PATCH v3 0/7] Rebase topology test

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
Patches are now expected to be dropped iff they are on upstream. I've also followed all of Johannes's other suggestions except for the one about topo-order. Martin von Zweigbergk (7): add simple tests of consistency across rebase types add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present

[PATCH v3 1/7] add simple tests of consistency across rebase types

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
Helped-by: Johannes Sixt j...@kdbg.org --- t/lib-rebase.sh | 15 t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh | 78 +++ 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+) create mode 100755 t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh diff --git a/t/lib-rebase.sh

[PATCH v3 3/7] add tests for rebasing of empty commits

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
--- t/t3401-rebase-partial.sh | 24 t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh | 58 +++ 2 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) diff --git a/t/t3401-rebase-partial.sh b/t/t3401-rebase-partial.sh index 58f4823..7ba1797 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
--- t/lib-rebase.sh | 17 t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh | 85 +++ 2 files changed, 102 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/lib-rebase.sh b/t/lib-rebase.sh index 62b3887..16eeb1c 100644 --- a/t/lib-rebase.sh +++ b/t/lib-rebase.sh @@

[PATCH v3 7/7] tests: move test for rebase messages from t3400 to t3406

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
t3406 is supposed to test messages from rebase operation, so let's move tests in t3400 that fit that description into 3406. Most of the functionality they tested, except for the messages, has now been subsumed by t3420. --- t/t3400-rebase.sh | 22 --

[PATCH v3 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
--- t/t3400-rebase.sh | 31 + t/t3401-rebase-partial.sh | 45 --- t/t3404-rebase-interactive.sh | 10 +- t/t3409-rebase-preserve-merges.sh | 53 t/t3425-rebase-topology-merges.sh | 252 ++ 5 files changed, 254

[PATCH v3 4/7] add tests for rebasing root

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
--- t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh | 129 ++ 1 file changed, 129 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh b/t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh index 81e3d59..659a7b3 100755 --- a/t/t3420-rebase-topology-linear.sh +++

[PATCH v3 6/7] t3406: modernize style

2013-05-31 Thread Martin von Zweigbergk
Update the following: - Quote 'setup' - Remove blank lines within test case body - Use test_commit instead of custom quick_one - Create branch topic from tag created by test_commit --- t/t3406-rebase-message.sh | 30 +- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 21

[PATCH v8 4/6] contrib: related: add option to parse from committish

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
For example master..feature-a. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 38 -- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related index

[PATCH v8 2/6] contrib: related: add option parsing

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 16 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related index 1b9b1e7..bde5b99 100755 --- a/contrib/related/git-related +++

[PATCH v8 5/6] contrib: related: parse committish like format-patch

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related index 3573237..585572b 100755 --- a/contrib/related/git-related +++

[PATCH v8 0/6] New git-related helper

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Hi, Since there hasn't been any comments of importance this is basically the same as v7, plus a few other patches to make it actually usable (for me). Unfortunately it turns out Ruby's optparse is not suitable for our needs, so I implemented a very small parser that is. Felipe Contreras (6):

[PATCH v8 1/6] Add new git-related helper to contrib

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
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

[PATCH v8 6/6] contrib: related: implement custom option parser

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Ruby's option parser is not extensible enough to keep unknown options. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 83 ++--- 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git

[PATCH v8 3/6] contrib: related: add support for multiple patches

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- 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 bde5b99..0de1c6c 100755 ---

[PATCH v9 0/4] New git-related helper

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Hi, I changed my mind, this is the same as v9 but minus some potentially controversial changes. Felipe Contreras (4): Add new git-related helper to contrib contrib: related: add support for multiple patches contrib: related: add option to parse from committish contrib: related: parse

[PATCH v9 4/4] contrib: related: parse committish like format-patch

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related index 20eb456..bded6f6 100755 --- a/contrib/related/git-related +++

[PATCH v9 1/4] Add new git-related helper to contrib

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
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

[PATCH v9 3/4] contrib: related: add option to parse from committish

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
For example master..feature-a. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- contrib/related/git-related | 38 -- 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/contrib/related/git-related b/contrib/related/git-related index

[PATCH v9 2/4] contrib: related: add support for multiple patches

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- 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 1b9b1e7..3379982 100755 ---

Re: [PATCH v8 0/6] New git-related helper

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote: Since there hasn't been any comments of importance this is basically the same as v7, plus a few other patches to make it actually usable (for me). Unfortunately it turns out Ruby's optparse is not suitable for

Re: [PATCH v7] Add new git-related helper to contrib

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra Not a single one of these comments makes a difference at all, all of them can wait until after the patch is merged, many of them are a matter of

Re: [PATCH v7] Add new git-related helper to contrib

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Felipe Contreras wrote: I was going to make these stylistic changes to make you happy, but then I realized the only that does really make sense is to change msg = nil to msg = false, and it's not even worth to waste a thought on changes like that. We don't have existing Ruby code in git.git

Re: [PATCH 2/2] lookup_commit_reference_gently: do not read non-{tag,commit}

2013-05-31 Thread Thomas Rast
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:00:23PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: lookup_commit_reference_gently unconditionally parses the object given to it. This slows down git-describe a lot if you have a repository with large tagged blobs in it: parse_object() will read the

Re: [PATCH v7] Add new git-related helper to contrib

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: I was going to make these stylistic changes to make you happy, but then I realized the only that does really make sense is to change msg = nil to msg = false, and it's not even worth to

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Alex Bennée
On 30 May 2013 20:30, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:21:55PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 16:33, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: snip Will it be

Re: [PATCH 2/2] lookup_commit_reference_gently: do not read non-{tag,commit}

2013-05-31 Thread Thomas Rast
Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: Thomas Rast wrote: + struct object *obj; + int type = sha1_object_info(sha1, NULL); + /* If it's neither tag nor commit, parsing the object is wasted effort */ + if (type != OBJ_TAG type != OBJ_COMMIT) +

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] read-cache: plug a few leaks

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:13 AM, René Scharfe rene.scha...@lsrfire.ath.cx wrote: Am 30.05.2013 15:34, schrieb Felipe Contreras: We don't free 'istate-cache' properly. Apparently 'initialized' doesn't really mean initialized, but loaded, or rather 'not-empty', and the cache can be used even

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Thomas Rast
Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 20:30, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:21:55PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 16:33, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Alex Bennée

[PATCH] submodule: remove unnecessary check

2013-05-31 Thread Felipe Contreras
read_cache() already does that check. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com --- submodule.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c index e728025..1821a5b 100644 --- a/submodule.c +++ b/submodule.c @@ -603,9 +603,8

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread John Keeping
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 09:14:49AM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: On 30 May 2013 20:30, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:21:55PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 16:33, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote:

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Alex Bennée
On 31 May 2013 09:24, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 20:30, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:21:55PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: On 30 May 2013 16:33,

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Thomas Rast
Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: I think you are right. I was brave (well I assumed the tags would come back from the upstream repo) and ran: git for-each-ref | grep refs/tags | grep commit | cut -d '/' -f 3 | xargs git tag -d So that deleted all unannotated tags pointing at

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Alex Bennée
On 31 May 2013 09:32, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 09:14:49AM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: On 30 May 2013 20:30, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:21:55PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes:

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread John Keeping
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 09:49:57AM +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: On 31 May 2013 09:32, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: Thomas is suggesting that you might have a tag that does not point at a commit but instead points to a blob object. It's looking like I just have some very heavy

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Alex Bennée
On 31 May 2013 09:46, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Alex Bennée kernel-hac...@bennee.com writes: I think you are right. I was brave (well I assumed the tags would come back from the upstream repo) and ran: git for-each-ref | grep refs/tags | grep commit | cut -d '/' -f 3 | xargs git

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Thomas Rast
Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch writes: However, if that turns out to be the culprit, it's not fixable currently[1]. Having commits with insanely long messages is just, well, insane. [1] unless we do a major rework of the loading infrastructure, so that we can teach it to load only the

Re: [PATCH 2/2] diffcore-pickaxe doc: document -S and -G properly

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Junio C Hamano wrote: [...] I agree with everything else, and made changes accordingly. This transformation limits the set of filepairs to those that change specified strings between the preimage and the postimage in a certain way. Definitely good. -Sblock

[PATCH 2/2] diffcore-pickaxe doc: document -S and -G properly

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
The documentation of -S and -G is very sketchy. Completely rewrite the sections in Documentation/diff-options.txt and Documentation/gitdiffcore.txt. References: 52e9578 ([PATCH] Introducing software archaeologist's tool pickaxe.) f506b8e (git log/diff: add -Gregexp that greps in the patch text)

[PATCH 1/2] diffcore-pickaxe: make error messages more consistent

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Currently, diffcore-pickaxe reports two distinct errors for the same user error: $ git log --pickaxe-regex -S'\1' fatal: invalid pickaxe regex: Invalid back reference $ git log -G'\1' # --pickaxe-regex is implied fatal: invalid log-grep regex: Invalid back reference Since the

[PATCH v4 0/2] Improve diffcore-pickaxe documentation

2013-05-31 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Junio had some suggestions in the previous round. The inter-diff follows. Yeah, word-diff is a bit messy. Which brings me to: is it possible to turn on word-diff only where heuristically appropriate? word-diff applied on the rewrite of the first paragraph of gitdiffcore.txt is a disaster, but

Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history

2013-05-31 Thread Johannes Sixt
Am 31.05.2013 08:49, schrieb Martin von Zweigbergk: +# f +# / +# a---b---c---g---h +# \ +# d---G---i +#\ \ +# e---u +# +# uppercase = cherry-picked +# h = reverted g ... +test_expect_success rebase -p --onto in merged history drops patches

contributing to git-mediawiki

2013-05-31 Thread Benoît Person
Hello, We are another team from Ensimag (Célestin MATTE Benoit PERSON) who will contribute to Git and more specifically to Git-Mediawiki for our one-month school project - and possibly more. We already have a couple of basic patches in local and will submit them in the upcoming days. After that,

Re: [PATCH 2/2] lookup_commit_reference_gently: do not read non-{tag,commit}

2013-05-31 Thread Jeff King
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 10:08:06AM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Have you measured the impact of this on normal operations? During a traversal, we spend a measurable amount of time looking up commits in packfiles, and this would presumably double it. I don't think so, but admittedly I didn't

Re: Poor performance of git describe in big repos

2013-05-31 Thread Jeff King
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 12:27:11PM +0200, Thomas Rast wrote: Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch writes: However, if that turns out to be the culprit, it's not fixable currently[1]. Having commits with insanely long messages is just, well, insane. [1] unless we do a major rework of the

Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2013, #09; Wed, 29)

2013-05-31 Thread John Keeping
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:23:40PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote: Am 30.05.2013 01:58, schrieb Junio C Hamano: * jk/submodule-subdirectory-ok (2013-04-24) 3 commits (merged to 'next' on 2013-04-24 at 6306b29) + submodule: fix quoting in relative_path() (merged to 'next' on 2013-04-22 at

git daemon --access-hook problem

2013-05-31 Thread Eugene Sajine
Hi, I'm trying to test this new feature and having problems getting any results in the following scenario: i have a repo in local folder /home/users/myuser/repos/projectA/.git i start the daemon with the following: git daemon --export-all --base-path=/home/users/myuser/repos

ls-files -i directories

2013-05-31 Thread Roland Schulz
Hi, the gitignore rules work so that if a directory is ignored, all files in that directory are ignored. While that behavior isn't clearly documented in gitignore, this behavior is consistent across all git tools (status, ls-files, ...). An exception is that listing the ignored files using

Re: ls-files -i directories

2013-05-31 Thread John Keeping
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:22:37PM -0400, Roland Schulz wrote: Hi, the gitignore rules work so that if a directory is ignored, all files in that directory are ignored. While that behavior isn't clearly documented in gitignore, this behavior is consistent across all git tools (status,

can we prevent reflog deletion when branch is deleted?

2013-05-31 Thread Sitaram Chamarty
Hi, Is there a way to prevent reflog deletion when the branch is deleted? The last entry could simply be a line where the second SHA is all 0's. -- Sitaram -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at

Re: can we prevent reflog deletion when branch is deleted?

2013-05-31 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/01/2013 03:31 AM, Sitaram Chamarty wrote: Is there a way to prevent reflog deletion when the branch is deleted? The last entry could simply be a line where the second SHA is all 0's. This is a known problem. The technical reason that this is not trivial to solve is the possibility of a

Re: can we prevent reflog deletion when branch is deleted?

2013-05-31 Thread Jeff King
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 05:00:07AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: This is a known problem. The technical reason that this is not trivial to solve is the possibility of a directory/file conflict between old reflog files and references that might be created subsequently (which in turn is a