On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 02:16:06PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 06/21/2016 07:48 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 01:43:18PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 08:35:54AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> >>> On 04/15/2016 05:45 PM, Scott Kostyshak
On 06/21/2016 07:48 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 01:43:18PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 08:35:54AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
>>> On 04/15/2016 05:45 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 01:43:18PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 08:35:54AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> > On 04/15/2016 05:45 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:49:55AM
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 08:35:54AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 04/15/2016 05:45 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:49:55AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > > > Le 28/03/2016 00:04, Scott
On 04/15/2016 05:45 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:49:55AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 28/03/2016 00:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
It seems we currently use "git show ${hash}" in our script.
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:49:55AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Le 28/03/2016 00:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
> > >It seems we currently use "git show ${hash}" in our script. Instead of
> > >doing two commands like I
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:49:55AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 28/03/2016 00:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
> >It seems we currently use "git show ${hash}" in our script. Instead of
> >doing two commands like I naively suggested above, what about the
> >following?
>
> What about "git
Le 28/03/2016 00:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
It seems we currently use "git show ${hash}" in our script. Instead of
doing two commands like I naively suggested above, what about the
following?
What about "git show --stat"?
JMarc
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 08:52:17PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> > Le 18/02/2016 02:58, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
> >> Would anyone else find it useful if the lyx-cvs messages showed the file
> >> names that were changed at the beginning of a message? One example is
>
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 18/02/2016 02:58, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>> Would anyone else find it useful if the lyx-cvs messages showed the file
>> names that were changed at the beginning of a message? One example is
>> that I would often like to know if a commit is documentation only or
Le 18/02/2016 02:58, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Would anyone else find it useful if the lyx-cvs messages showed the file
names that were changed at the beginning of a message? One example is
that I would often like to know if a commit is documentation only or if
there is another change that I
Would anyone else find it useful if the lyx-cvs messages showed the file
names that were changed at the beginning of a message? One example is
that I would often like to know if a commit is documentation only or if
there is another change that I would like to take a look at.
What I would
12 matches
Mail list logo
