Petr Baudis wrote:
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:50:48AM CEST, I got a letter
Well, yes, but the last merge point search may not be so simple:
A --1---26---7
B\ `-4-. /
C `-3-5'
Now, when at 7, your last merge point is not 1, but 2.
...and this is obviously wrong,
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:50:48AM CEST, I got a letter
where Petr Baudis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:39:40AM CEST, I got a letter
> where Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> > On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:39:40AM CEST, I got a letter
where Geert Uytterhoeven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
..snip..
> > Basically, when you look at merge(1) :
> >
> > SYNOPSIS
> >merge [ options ] file1 file2 file3
> >
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
> Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:20:18AM CEST, I got a letter
> where "Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> > >Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
> > >where "Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:20:18AM CEST, I got a letter
where Adam J. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
where Adam J. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:39:40AM CEST, I got a letter
where Geert Uytterhoeven [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
..snip..
Basically, when you look at merge(1) :
SYNOPSIS
merge [ options ] file1 file2 file3
DESCRIPTION
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:50:48AM CEST, I got a letter
where Petr Baudis [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 10:39:40AM CEST, I got a letter
where Geert Uytterhoeven [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
Petr Baudis wrote:
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 11:50:48AM CEST, I got a letter
Well, yes, but the last merge point search may not be so simple:
A --1---26---7
B\ `-4-. /
C `-3-5'
Now, when at 7, your last merge point is not 1, but 2.
...and this is obviously wrong,
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:20:18AM CEST, I got a letter
where "Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> >Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
> >where "Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> >..snip..
> >> Graydon Hoare. (By
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:45:38 +0200, Peter Baudis wrote:
> Hello,
> please do not trim the cc list so agressively.
Sorry. I read the list from a web site that does not show the
cc lists. I'll try to cc more people from the relevant discussions
though. On the other hand, I've dropped Linus
Hello,
please do not trim the cc list so agressively.
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
where "Adam J. Richter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
..snip..
> Graydon Hoare. (By the way, I would prefer that git just punt to
> user level programs for diff
* Petr Baudis:
>> Almost certainly, v3 will be incompatible with v2 because it adds
>> further restrictions. This means that your proposal would result in
>> software which is not redistributable by third parties.
>
> Hmm, what would be actually the point in introducing further
> restrictions?
On 2005-04-11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one [...]
You may want to use a file from GPL'ed monotone that
implements a substantial diff optimization described in the August
1989 paper by Sun Wu, Udi Manber and Gene Myers ("An
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:40:00AM CEST, I got a letter
where Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> * Ingo Molnar:
>
> > is there any fundamental problem with going with v2 right now, and then
> > once v3 is out and assuming it looks ok, all newly copyrightable bits
>
* Ingo Molnar:
> is there any fundamental problem with going with v2 right now, and then
> once v3 is out and assuming it looks ok, all newly copyrightable bits
> (new files, rewrites, substantial contributions, etc.) get a v3
> copyright? (and the collection itself would be v3 too) That
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in
> a COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
>
> I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one,
> but I was wondering if anybody
* Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in
a COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one,
but I was wondering if anybody really
* Ingo Molnar:
is there any fundamental problem with going with v2 right now, and then
once v3 is out and assuming it looks ok, all newly copyrightable bits
(new files, rewrites, substantial contributions, etc.) get a v3
copyright? (and the collection itself would be v3 too) That method
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 10:40:00AM CEST, I got a letter
where Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
* Ingo Molnar:
is there any fundamental problem with going with v2 right now, and then
once v3 is out and assuming it looks ok, all newly copyrightable bits
(new
On 2005-04-11, Linus Torvalds wrote:
I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one [...]
You may want to use a file from GPL'ed monotone that
implements a substantial diff optimization described in the August
1989 paper by Sun Wu, Udi Manber and Gene Myers (An O(NP)
* Petr Baudis:
Almost certainly, v3 will be incompatible with v2 because it adds
further restrictions. This means that your proposal would result in
software which is not redistributable by third parties.
Hmm, what would be actually the point in introducing further
restrictions? Anyone who
Hello,
please do not trim the cc list so agressively.
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
where Adam J. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
..snip..
Graydon Hoare. (By the way, I would prefer that git just punt to
user level programs for diff and
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:45:38 +0200, Peter Baudis wrote:
Hello,
please do not trim the cc list so agressively.
Sorry. I read the list from a web site that does not show the
cc lists. I'll try to cc more people from the relevant discussions
though. On the other hand, I've dropped Linus from
Dear diary, on Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 03:20:18AM CEST, I got a letter
where Adam J. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 05:46:38PM CEST, I got a letter
where Adam J. Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
..snip..
Graydon Hoare. (By the way, I would
> Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
> COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I think GPLv2 would create the least amount of objection in the
community, so I'd probably want to go with that.
Nur Hussein
-
To
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:20:52AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
> Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
> COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
>
> I'm inclined to go with
Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one, but I
was wondering if anybody really had strong opinions. For example, I'd
really
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:46:50AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
> >
> > (BTW, it would be useful to have a tool which just blindly takes what
> > you give it on input and throws it to an
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
>
> (BTW, it would be useful to have a tool which just blindly takes what
> you give it on input and throws it to an object of given type; I will
> need to construct arbitrary commits during the rebuild if I'm to keep
> the correct dates.)
Hah. That's
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:10:58AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> told me that...
>
>
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
> >
> > I currently already do a merge when you track someone's source - it will
> > throw away your previous HEAD record
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:10:58AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
I currently already do a merge when you track someone's source - it will
throw away your previous HEAD record though
Not
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
(BTW, it would be useful to have a tool which just blindly takes what
you give it on input and throws it to an object of given type; I will
need to construct arbitrary commits during the rebuild if I'm to keep
the correct dates.)
Hah. That's what
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 01:46:50AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote:
(BTW, it would be useful to have a tool which just blindly takes what
you give it on input and throws it to an object of
Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I'm inclined to go with GPLv2 just because it's the most common one, but I
was wondering if anybody really had strong opinions. For example, I'd
really
Dear diary, on Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 02:20:52AM CEST, I got a letter
where Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] told me that...
Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I'm inclined to go with GPLv2
Btw, does anybody have strong opinions on the license? I didn't put in a
COPYING file exactly because I was torn between GPLv2 and OSL2.1.
I think GPLv2 would create the least amount of objection in the
community, so I'd probably want to go with that.
Nur Hussein
-
To
36 matches
Mail list logo
