Am 17.03.2013 06:40, schrieb Jeff King:
We do have the capability to roll out to one or a few of our servers
(the granularity is not 0.2%, but it is still small). I'm going to try
to keep us more in sync with upstream git, but I don't know if I will
get to the point of ever deploying "master" or
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:17:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > I almost wonder if we should cut it out entirely. It is definitely a
> > possible race condition, but I wonder if anybody actually hits it in
> > practice (and if they do, the consequence is that the fetch fails and
> > needs to b
Jeff King writes:
>> > [3/3]: upload-pack: load non-tip "want" objects from disk
>> >
>> > While investigating the bug, I found some weirdness around the
>> > stateless-rpc check_non_tip code. As far as I can tell, that code
>> > never actually gets triggered. It's not too surprisin
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:16:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > ... (I had several bug reports
> > within a few hours of deploying v1.8.1.5 on github.com)
>
> Nice to have a pro at the widely used site ;-) I often wish it had
> a mechanism to deploy the tip of 'master' or 'maint', or even 'n
Jeff King writes:
> This series fixes the issue I mentioned recently with upload-pack, where
> we might feed unparsed objects to the revision parser. The bug is in
> 435c833 (the tip of the jk/peel-ref topic), which is in v1.8.1 and up.
Good to see follow-up from a responsible contributor ;-)
>
This series fixes the issue I mentioned recently with upload-pack, where
we might feed unparsed objects to the revision parser. The bug is in
435c833 (the tip of the jk/peel-ref topic), which is in v1.8.1 and up.
The fix should go to maint. The bug breaks shallow clones from
repositories with pac
6 matches
Mail list logo
