Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Hash abstraction

Junio C Hamano writes: > "brian m. carlson" writes: > >> This is a series proposing a basic abstraction for hash functions. >> >> The full description of the series can be found here: >>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Git/Packet.pm: rename packet_required_key_val_read()

Jonathan Nieder writes: >>> This comment doesn't tell me how to use the function. How do I detect >>> whether it successfully read a line? What do the return values >>> represent? What happens if the line it read doesn't match the key? >> >> Would this work for both of

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Git/Packet.pm: rename packet_required_key_val_read()

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > This comment doesn't tell me how to use the function. How do I detect whether it successfully read a line? What do the return values represent? What happens

Re: [PATCHv5 7/7] builtin/describe.c: describe a blob

Stefan Beller writes: > ... > fixed. > ... > fixed the text... > ... > I am not fully convinced all descriptions are in recent history, but I > tend to agree that most are, so probably the trade off is a wash. So what do we want with this topic? I think the "teach 'git log'

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Git/Packet.pm: rename packet_required_key_val_read()

Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Jonathan Nieder writes: This comment doesn't tell me how to use the function. How do I detect whether it successfully read a line? What do the return values

Re: [PATCH] defer expensive load_ref_decorations until needed

Junio C Hamano writes: > Other than that, I like what this patch attempts to do. A nicely > identified low-hanging fruit ;-). Having said that, this will have a bad interaction with another topic in flight: <20171121213341.13939-1-rafa.al...@gmail.com> Perhaps this should

[PATCH v3 08/33] directory rename detection: files/directories in the way of some renames

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 320 1 file changed, 320 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 1dcf010aa6..29b2af7f19 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 01/33] Tighten and correct a few testcases for merging and cherry-picking

t3501 had a testcase originally added in 05f2dfb965 (cherry-pick: demonstrate a segmentation fault, 2016-11-26) to ensure cherry-pick wouldn't segfault when working with a dirty file involved in a rename. While the segfault was fixed, there was another problem this test demonstrated: namely, that

[PATCH v3 30/33] merge-recursive: fix remaining directory rename + dirty overwrite cases

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 26 +++--- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 8 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c index

[PATCH v3 07/33] directory rename detection: partially renamed directory testcase/discussion

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 104 1 file changed, 104 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 0ccabed4a2..1dcf010aa6 100755 ---

Re: [PATCH] git-pull: Pass -4/-6 option to git-fetch

Shuyu Wei writes: > The -4/-6 option should be passed through to git-fetch > to be consistent with the git-pull man page. > > Signed-off-by: Wei Shuyu > --- Sounds sensible. "git pull -h" output automatically gets extended with this change, too. Thanks. >

[PATCH v3 32/33] merge-recursive: avoid spurious rename/rename conflict from dir renames

If a file on one side of history was renamed, and merely modified on the other side, then applying a directory rename to the modified side gives us a rename/rename(1to2) conflict. We should only apply directory renames to pairs representing either adds or renames. Making this change means that a

[PATCH v3 17/33] merge-recursive: fix leaks of allocated renames and diff_filepairs

get_renames() has always zero'ed out diff_queued_diff.nr while only manually free'ing diff_filepairs that did not correspond to renames. Further, it allocated struct renames that were tucked away in the return string_list. Make sure all of these are deallocated when we are done with them.

[PATCH v3 12/33] directory rename detection: miscellaneous testcases to complete coverage

I came up with the testcases in the first eight sections before coding up the implementation. The testcases in this section were mostly ones I thought of while coding/debugging, and which I was too lazy to insert into the previous sections because I didn't want to re-label with all the testcase

[PATCH v3 27/33] merge-recursive: apply necessary modifications for directory renames

This commit hooks together all the directory rename logic by making the necessary changes to the rename struct, it's dst_entry, and the diff_filepair under consideration. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 187

[PATCH v3 33/33] merge-recursive: ensure we write updates for directory-renamed file

When a file is present in HEAD before the merge and the other side of the merge does not modify that file, we try to avoid re-writing the file and making it stat-dirty. However, when a file is present in HEAD before the merge and was in a directory that was renamed by the other side of the merge,

[PATCH v3 14/33] directory rename detection: tests for handling overwriting dirty files

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 436 1 file changed, 436 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 7408c788fc..88243651f7 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 16/33] merge-recursive: introduce new functions to handle rename logic

The amount of logic in merge_trees() relative to renames was just a few lines, but split it out into new handle_renames() and cleanup_renames() functions to prepare for additional logic to be added to each. No code or logic changes, just a new place to put stuff for when the rename detection

[PATCH v3 04/33] directory rename detection: basic testcases

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 430 1 file changed, 430 insertions(+) create mode 100755 t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh

[PATCH v3 22/33] merge-recursive: check for directory level conflicts

Before trying to apply directory renames to paths within the given directories, we want to make sure that there aren't conflicts at the directory level. There will be additional checks at the individual file level too, which will be added later. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren

[PATCH v3 03/33] merge-recursive: add explanation for src_entry and dst_entry

If I have to walk through the debugger and inspect the values found in here in order to figure out their meaning, despite having known these things inside and out some years back, then they probably need a comment for the casual reader to explain their purpose. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren

[PATCH v3 25/33] merge-recursive: check for file level conflicts then get new name

Before trying to apply directory renames to paths within the given directories, we want to make sure that there aren't conflicts at the file level either. If there aren't any, then get the new name from any directory renames. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c

[PATCH v3 29/33] merge-recursive: fix overwriting dirty files involved in renames

This fixes an issue that existed before my directory rename detection patches that affects both normal renames and renames implied by directory rename detection. Additional codepaths that only affect overwriting of directy files that are involved in directory rename detection will be added in a

[PATCH v3 06/33] directory rename detection: testcases to avoid taking detection too far

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 150 1 file changed, 150 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 335aa1c145..0ccabed4a2 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 28/33] merge-recursive: avoid clobbering untracked files with directory renames

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 42 +++-- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 6 +++--- 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c index

[PATCH v3 11/33] directory rename detection: testcases exploring possibly suboptimal merges

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 392 1 file changed, 392 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 2c57a02c6d..b153468a5c 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 09/33] directory rename detection: testcases checking which side did the rename

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 321 1 file changed, 321 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 29b2af7f19..5db2986de8 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 23/33] merge-recursive: add a new hashmap for storing file collisions

Directory renames with the ability to merge directories opens up the possibility of add/add/add/.../add conflicts, if each of the N directories being merged into one target directory all had a file with the same name. We need a way to check for and report on such collisions; this hashmap will be

[PATCH v3 00/33] Add directory rename detection to git

This patchset introduces directory rename detection to merge-recursive; I'm resubmitting just a few hours after my PATCHv2 because I didn't know about the DEVELOPER=1 flag previously, and my code had a number of warnings/errors. I would have just submitted fixup/squash patches, but when I

[PATCH v3 13/33] directory rename detection: tests for handling overwriting untracked files

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 337 1 file changed, 337 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 9e00a26c69..7408c788fc 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 19/33] merge-recursive: split out code for determining diff_filepairs

Create a new function, get_diffpairs() to compute the diff_filepairs between two trees. While these are currently only used in get_renames(), I want them to be available to some new functions. No actual logic changes yet. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c |

[PATCH v3 18/33] merge-recursive: make !o->detect_rename codepath more obvious

Previously, if !o->detect_rename then get_renames() would return an empty string_list, and then process_renames() would have nothing to iterate over. It seems more straightforward to simply avoid calling either function in that case. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren ---

[PATCH v3 05/33] directory rename detection: directory splitting testcases

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 137 1 file changed, 137 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index d8ead7c56b..335aa1c145 100755 ---

[PATCH v3 31/33] directory rename detection: new testcases showcasing a pair of bugs

Add a testcase showing spurious rename/rename(1to2) conflicts occurring due to directory rename detection. Also add a pair of testcases dealing with moving directory hierarchies around that were suggested by Stefan Beller as "food for thought" during his review of an earlier patch series, but

[PATCH v3 26/33] merge-recursive: when comparing files, don't include trees

get_renames() would look up stage data that already existed (populated in get_unmerged(), taken from whatever unpack_trees() created), and if it didn't exist, would call insert_stage_data() to create the necessary entry for the given file. The insert_stage_data() fallback becomes much more

[PATCH v3 15/33] merge-recursive: move the get_renames() function

I want to re-use some other functions in the file without moving those other functions or dealing with a handful of annoying split function declarations and definitions. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 139

[PATCH v3 20/33] merge-recursive: add a new hashmap for storing directory renames

This just adds dir_rename_entry and the associated functions; code using these will be added in subsequent commits. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 35 +++ merge-recursive.h | 8 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)

[PATCH v3 24/33] merge-recursive: add computation of collisions due to dir rename & merging

directory renaming and merging can cause one or more files to be moved to where an existing file is, or to cause several files to all be moved to the same (otherwise vacant) location. Add checking and reporting for such cases, falling back to no-directory-rename handling for such paths.

[PATCH v3 02/33] merge-recursive: fix logic ordering issue

merge_trees() did a variety of work, including: * Calling get_unmerged() to get unmerged entries * Calling record_df_conflict_files() with all unmerged entries to do some work to ensure we could handle D/F conflicts correctly * Calling get_renames() to check for renames. An easily

[PATCH v3 21/33] merge-recursive: add get_directory_renames()

This populates a list of directory renames for us. The list of directory renames is not yet used, but will be in subsequent commits. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- merge-recursive.c | 152 ++ 1 file changed, 152

[PATCH v3 10/33] directory rename detection: more involved edge/corner testcases

Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren --- t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh | 381 1 file changed, 381 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh b/t/t6043-merge-rename-directories.sh index 5db2986de8..2c57a02c6d 100755 ---

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 33

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > That said, I believe that the gitattributes(5) manpage does an okay > job of covering this and that that thread came to a clear conclusion: > > >

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: make sign_off_header a file local symbol

On 21/11/17 01:06, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones writes: > >> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones >> --- >> >> Hi Miklos, >> >> If you need to re-roll your 'mv/cherry-pick-s' branch, could you >> please squash this into the relevant

Re: [PATCH] list-objects-filter-options: fix up some sparse warnings

On 21/11/17 01:16, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Ramsay Jones wrote: > >> If you need to re-roll your 'jh/object-filtering' branch, could you >> please squash this (or something like it) into the relevant patch >> (commit bf0aedcbe1, "list-objects: filter objects in traverse_commit_list",

[PATCH] doc: Add missing "-n" (dry-run) option to reflog man page

While the "git reflog" man page supports both "--dry-run" and "-n" for a dry run, the man page mentions only the former, not the latter. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- --- a/Documentation/git-reflog.txt +++ b/Documentation/git-reflog.txt @@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ depending

Re: t3512 & t3513 'unexpected passes'

On Monday 20 November 2017 at 08:16 pm +, Ramsay Jones wrote: > For several days, I have been staring at some 'unexpected passes' in > the t3512-cherry-pick-submodule.sh and t3513-revert-submodule.sh test > files (tests #11-13 in both cases). > > I finally found time tonight to 'git bisect'

Re: cherry-pick very slow on big repository

Elijah Newren: Sure, take a look at the big-repo-small-cherry-pick branch of https://github.com/newren/git With those changes, the time usage is the same as if I set merge.renameLimit=1 for the repository, and the end result is identical: $ time

[no subject]

Hey,i am Lindsey ,How's everything with you,I have interest on you after going through your profile I really want to have a good friendship with you

[PATCH 2/2] Git/Packet.pm: use 'if' instead of 'unless'

The code is more understandable with 'if' instead of 'unless'. Signed-off-by: Christian Couder --- perl/Git/Packet.pm | 16 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/perl/Git/Packet.pm b/perl/Git/Packet.pm index

[PATCH 1/2] Git/Packet.pm: rename packet_required_key_val_read()

The function calls itself "required", but it does not die when it sees an unexpected EOF. Let's rename it to "packet_key_val_read()". Signed-off-by: Christian Couder --- These 2 patches are a late follow up from:

Re: cherry-pick very slow on big repository

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Peter Krefting wrote: > Elijah Newren: > >> Sure, take a look at the big-repo-small-cherry-pick branch of >> https://github.com/newren/git > > > With those changes, the time usage is the same as if I set > merge.renameLimit=1 for the

Re: [PATCH 1/5] p5550: factor our nonsense-pack creation

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 06:55:51PM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > p5550: factor our nonsense-pack creation > > s/our/out/, I guess. Heh, yes. I even fixed it once, but I have the funny habit of noticing such typos while

bash script to pull in branch B the changes from parent branch A

Hi, I have a bash script to pull in branch B the changes from parent branch A that does the following: cd repo-in-branchB git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/branchB git pull git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/branchA git pull git branch --set-upstream-to=origin/branchB It does exactly what I

Re: core.safecrlf warning is confusing[improvement suggestion?]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 01:18:30PM +0800, Vladimir Nikishkin wrote: > Hello, everyone. > > I have the following question. > > So I have a fresh git repository after git init, on Windows. > > core.autocrlf is true explicitly, and core.safecrlf is true implicitly. > > I want to have LF line

[PATCH] prune: add "--progress" to man page and usage msg

Add mention of git prune's "--progress" option to the SYNOPSIS and DESCRIPTION sections of the man page, and to the usage message of "git prune" itself. While we're here, move the explanation of "--" toward the end of the DESCRIPTION section, where it belongs. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day

[PATCH] notes: fix erroneous "git notes prune [-n | -v]" message

It seems clear that the man page SYNPOSIS and the usage message referring to: git notes prune [-n | -v] is incorrect, as "-n" (dry run) and "-v" (verbose) are not alternatives, so fix both places to refer to: git notes prune [-n] [-v | -q] to match the rest of the man page. Signed-off-by:

[PATCH v2 4/4] builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix

Instead of hard-coding the offset strlen("refs/heads/") to skip the prefix "refs/heads/" use the skip_prefix() function which is more communicative and verifies that the string actually starts with that prefix. Though we don't check for the result of verification here as it's (almost) always the

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 33

Christian Couder writes: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> >> That said, I believe that the gitattributes(5) manpage does an okay >> job of covering this and that that thread came to a clear conclusion: >> >> >>

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 33

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Christian Couder writes: > >> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:10 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >>> >>> That said, I believe that the gitattributes(5) manpage does an okay >>> job

[RFC PATCH] builtin/worktree: enhance worktree removal

The new feature to 'remove' worktree was handy to remove specific worktrees. It didn't cover one particular case of removal. Specifically, if there is an "entry" (a directory in /.git/worktrees) for a worktree but the worktree repository itself does not exist then it means that the "entry" is

Re: [PATCH] list-objects-filter-options: fix up some sparse warnings

On 11/20/2017 6:39 PM, Ramsay Jones wrote: In particular, sparse complains that the armor_{en,de}code_arg() functions are 'not declared - should they be static?'. Since the armor_decode_arg() symbol does not require more than file visibility, we can simply mark the declaration with static.

[PATCH] rebase: rebasing can also be done when HEAD is detached

In a repository when attempting to rebase when the HEAD is detached and it is already up to date with upstream (so there's nothing to do), the following message is shown Current branch HEAD is up to date. which is clearly wrong as HEAD is not a branch. Handle the special case of HEAD

[PATCH v2] doc: Add missing "-n" (dry-run) option to reflog man page

While the "git reflog" man page supports both "--dry-run" and "-n" for a dry run, the man page mentions only the former, not the latter. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- sorry, i accidentally chopped off the leading lines of the patch in the earlier post. diff

pedantry: is there a standard for what should be in the SYNOPSIS?

following up on an earlier question of mine, is there a standard for what options should be listed in either the SYNOPSIS or the DESCRIPTION sections of a man page? i ask since i'm seeing some definite inconsistency. in addition to the patch i submitted earlier, here are some other examples.

Re: pedantry: is there a standard for what should be in the SYNOPSIS?

Hi, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > following up on an earlier question of mine, is there a standard for > what options should be listed in either the SYNOPSIS or the > DESCRIPTION sections of a man page? i ask since i'm seeing some > definite inconsistency. No standard. Seems worth starting a

Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Parial clone part 3: clone, fetch, fetch-pack, upload-pack, and tests

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:17:08 + Jeff Hostetler wrote: > From: Jeff Hostetler > > This part 3 of a 3 part sequence partial clone. It assumes > that part 1 and part 2 are in place. > > This patch series is labeled as V4 to keep it in sync with

Re: [PATCH] notes: fix erroneous "git notes prune [-n | -v]" message

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > It seems clear that the man page SYNPOSIS and the usage message > > referring to: > > > > git notes prune [-n | -v] > > > > is incorrect, as "-n" (dry run) and "-v" (verbose) are not > > alternatives, so fix

[PATCH v3 4/4] builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix

Instead of hard-coding the offset strlen("refs/heads/") to skip the prefix "refs/heads/" use the skip_prefix() function which is more communicative and verifies that the string actually starts with that prefix. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam --- Changes in v3: -

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix

On Wednesday 22 November 2017 12:08 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: Though we don't check for the result of verification here as it's (almost) always the case that the string does start with "refs/heads", it's just

Re: [PATCH] notes: fix erroneous "git notes prune [-n | -v]" message

Hi, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > It seems clear that the man page SYNPOSIS and the usage message > referring to: > > git notes prune [-n | -v] > > is incorrect, as "-n" (dry run) and "-v" (verbose) are not > alternatives, so fix both places to refer to: > > git notes prune [-n] [-v | -q] > > to

Re: t3512 & t3513 'unexpected passes'

On 21/11/17 10:44, Adam Dinwoodie wrote: > On Monday 20 November 2017 at 08:16 pm +, Ramsay Jones wrote: >> For several days, I have been staring at some 'unexpected passes' in >> the t3512-cherry-pick-submodule.sh and t3513-revert-submodule.sh test >> files (tests #11-13 in both cases).

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Git/Packet.pm: use 'if' instead of 'unless'

Hi, Christian Couder wrote: > The code is more understandable with 'if' instead of 'unless'. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Couder > --- > perl/Git/Packet.pm | 16 > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) I'm agnostic about that. In some ways

Re: [PATCH] notes: correct 'git notes prune' options to '[-n] [-v]'

Robert P. J. Day wrote: > Currently, 'git notes prune' in man page and usage message > incorrectly lists options as '[-n | -v]', rather than '[-n] [-v]'. > > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day > --- Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder Thanks. > diff --git

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > On Wednesday 22 November 2017 12:08 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> The original code unconditionally uses "+ 11", which says that the >> prefix is _always_ present. This commit message muddies the waters [...] > >

Re: [PATCH] notes: fix erroneous "git notes prune [-n | -v]" message

Robert P. J. Day wrote: > so it should simply be corrected to: > > git notes prune [-n] [-v] > > sound about right? Sounds good to me. Thanks for finding these confusing docs, by the way. Jonathan

Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > Instead of hard-coding the offset strlen("refs/heads/") to skip > the prefix "refs/heads/" use the skip_prefix() function which > is more communicative and verifies that the string actually > starts with that

Re: [PATCH 1/2] Git/Packet.pm: rename packet_required_key_val_read()

Hi, Christian Couder wrote: > The function calls itself "required", but it does not die when it > sees an unexpected EOF. > Let's rename it to "packet_key_val_read()". > > Signed-off-by: Christian Couder > --- nit: please wrap lines to a consistent width, to make the

[PATCH] notes: correct 'git notes prune' options to '[-n] [-v]'

Currently, 'git notes prune' in man page and usage message incorrectly lists options as '[-n | -v]', rather than '[-n] [-v]'. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- i think i got it right this time. diff --git a/Documentation/git-notes.txt b/Documentation/git-notes.txt

[PATCH v5 0/6] Partial clone part 1: object filtering

From: Jeff Hostetler Here is V5 of the list-object filtering, rev-list, and pack-objects. This version addresses comments on the V4 series. I removed the questionable character encoding scheme. And I removed or clarified use of the term "partial clone" to refer to a

[PATCH v5 1/6] dir: allow exclusions from blob in addition to file

From: Jeff Hostetler Refactor add_excludes() to separate the reading of the exclude file into a buffer and the parsing of the buffer into exclude_list items. Add add_excludes_from_blob_to_list() to allow an exclude file be specified with an OID without assuming a local

[PATCH v5 4/6] list-objects: filter objects in traverse_commit_list

From: Jeff Hostetler Create traverse_commit_list_filtered() and add filtering interface to allow certain objects to be omitted from the traversal. Update traverse_commit_list() to be a wrapper for the above with a null filter to minimize the number of callers that needed

[PATCH v5 3/6] oidset: add iterator methods to oidset

From: Jeff Hostetler Add the usual iterator methods to oidset. Add oidset_remove(). Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler --- oidset.c | 10 ++ oidset.h | 36 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+) diff --git

[PATCH v5 06/10] index-pack: refactor writing of .keep files

From: Jonathan Tan In a subsequent commit, index-pack will be taught to write ".promisor" files which are similar to the ".keep" files it knows how to write. Refactor the writing of ".keep" files, so that the implementation of writing ".promisor" files becomes easier.

[PATCH v5 03/14] fetch: refactor calculation of remote list

From: Jonathan Tan Separate out the calculation of remotes to be fetched from and the actual fetching. This will allow us to include an additional step before the actual fetching in a subsequent commit. Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan ---

Re: pedantry: is there a standard for what should be in the SYNOPSIS?

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > following up on an earlier question of mine, is there a standard > > for what options should be listed in either the SYNOPSIS or the > > DESCRIPTION sections of a man page? i ask since i'm seeing some > > definite

Re: [PATCH] gitcli: tweak "man gitcli" for clarity

On Tue, 21 Nov 2017, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Robert P. J. Day > wrote: > > No major changes, just some rewording and showing some variations of > > general Git commands. > > > > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day > >

[PATCH v2] gitcli: tweak "man gitcli" for clarity

No major changes, just some rewording and showing some variations of general Git commands. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- diff --git a/Documentation/gitcli.txt b/Documentation/gitcli.txt index 9f13266a6..d690d1ff0 100644 --- a/Documentation/gitcli.txt +++

Re: [RFC PATCH] builtin/worktree: enhance worktree removal

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > The new feature to 'remove' worktree was handy to remove specific > worktrees. It didn't cover one particular case of removal. Specifically, > if there is an "entry" (a directory in /.git/worktrees) > for a

[PATCH v2] log: add option to choose which refs to decorate

When `log --decorate` is used, git will decorate commits with all available refs. While in most cases this the desired effect, under some conditions it can lead to excessively verbose output. Introduce two command line options, `--decorate-refs=` and `--decorate-refs-exclude=` to allow the user

Re: [PATCH v2] gitcli: tweak "man gitcli" for clarity

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 04:27:59PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > No major changes, just some rewording and showing some variations of > general Git commands. > > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day > > --- > > diff --git a/Documentation/gitcli.txt

Boat Owners List

Hi, Greeting of the day! Would you be interested in acquiring an email list of "Boat Owners" from USA? Our Databases:-1.RV Owners List 2.Sail and Power boat Owners List 3.Travelers List 4.Fishing Enthusiasts List 5.Cruise Travelers List

Re: some apparent inaccuracies in "man git-worktree"

Hi, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 14 Nov 2017, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 3:43 AM, Robert P. J. Day >> wrote: >>> from "man git-worktree", there seem to be some inaccuracies in the >>> SYNOPSIS regarding the "add" subcommand: >>> >>> git

Re: [PATCH] gitcli: tweak "man gitcli" for clarity

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > No major changes, just some rewording and showing some variations of > general Git commands. > > Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day > --- > diff --git a/Documentation/gitcli.txt

Re: [PATCH] git-send-email: fix get_maintainer.pl regression

Eric Sunshine writes: > A few more comments/observations... > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: >> diff --git a/perl/Git.pm b/perl/Git.pm >> @@ -936,6 +936,9 @@ sub parse_mailboxes { >>

Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Parial clone part 3: clone, fetch, fetch-pack, upload-pack, and tests

On 11/21/2017 1:17 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote: On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 18:17:08 + Jeff Hostetler wrote: From: Jeff Hostetler This part 3 of a 3 part sequence partial clone. It assumes that part 1 and part 2 are in place. This patch series is

[PATCH v5 5/6] rev-list: add list-objects filtering support

From: Jeff Hostetler Teach rev-list to use the filtering provided by the traverse_commit_list_filtered() interface to omit unwanted objects from the result. Object filtering is only allowed when one of the "--objects*" options are used. When the "--filter-print-omitted"

[PATCH v5 6/6] pack-objects: add list-objects filtering

From: Jeff Hostetler Teach pack-objects to use the filtering provided by the traverse_commit_list_filtered() interface to omit unwanted objects from the resulting packfile. Filtering requires the use of the "--stdout" option. Add t5317 test. In the future, we will

[PATCH v5 2/6] oidmap: add oidmap iterator methods

From: Jeff Hostetler Add the usual map iterator functions to oidmap. Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler --- oidmap.h | 22 ++ 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) diff --git a/oidmap.h b/oidmap.h index 18f54cd..d3cd2bb 100644 ---

[PATCH v5 00/14] Parial clone part 3: clone, fetch, fetch-pack, upload-pack, and tests

From: Jeff Hostetler This is V5 of part 3 of partial clone. It assumes that V5 of parts 1 and 2 are already present. This version carries forward the cleanup described in part 1 WRT filter argument encoding. Jeff Hostetler (5): upload-pack: add object filtering for

[PATCH v5 01/14] upload-pack: add object filtering for partial clone

From: Jeff Hostetler Teach upload-pack to negotiate object filtering over the protocol and to send filter parameters to pack-objects. This is intended for partial clone and fetch. The idea to make upload-pack configurable using uploadpack.allowFilter comes from Jonathan

  1   2   3   >