On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:47:15PM -0700, Justin Patrin wrote:
On 6/30/06, Nathaniel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 05:44:25PM +0400, Arseny Nasokin wrote:
- revisions can be complex (why it? why not per-action?), _so_ can't be
disapproved. split revisions?
You
Hi all,
I've checked in two new automate commands to n.v.m:
- 'mtn automate branches' lists all branches not ignored by the lua
hook 'ignore_branches', one branch name per line, alphabetically sorted.
- 'mtn automate tags [branch_pattern]' lists all tags together with the
revision they point
Is the giant list of test cases in testsuite.lua there because there's
no readdir() equivalent in Lua's standard library, or is there some
better reason?
If it's the former, does anyone object to my snarfing Steve Kemp's
lua-fs extension[1] into our local copy of the interpreter, and using
that
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 11:01:03AM -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
Given that hooks already have access to os.remove and os.execute (==
system()) I don't think adding filesystem primitives increases
people's exposure to dangerous hooks, although I suppose an argument
could be made for its being
Hallo,
I should remember to click the Reply to all button...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Alex Queiroz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jul 4, 2006 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] Question for Tim - testsuite.lua giant list
To: Zack Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hallo,
On
Hallo,
La la la, la la la, reply to all, reply to all...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Alex Queiroz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Jul 4, 2006 3:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Question for Tim - testsuite.lua giant list
To: Jack Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hallo,
On 7/4/06,
On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 10:26 -0700, Zack Weinberg wrote:
Is the giant list of test cases in testsuite.lua there because there's
no readdir() equivalent in Lua's standard library, or is there some
better reason?
No, I could fairly easily add that. One reason is that it seems nice to
have the
Hi,
I just tracked down a subtle and annoying netsync bug that has been
pestering us for a while. It involves a not-very-hard-to-trigger case
wherein the nesting of queries and subqueries gets broken. The symptom
is just netsync going dead awaiting i/o, with no obvious logic errors or
data
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 12:04:07PM -0700, Graydon Hoare wrote:
2. Explicit lists aren't always a bad thing. Our makefile uses
them too. You trade one bug (executing something you didn't
intend) for another (failure to execute something you
expected but forgot to list).
I
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 05:50:56PM +0400, Arseny Nasokin wrote:
Yes, I know it, but I can't edit revision at that case: I must
create backward mtn-diff for several files and create new revision
:( And for added/dropped files I should disapprove all and commit it
again. It's too mad when time
On 7/4/06, Daniel Carosone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 05:50:56PM +0400, Arseny Nasokin wrote:
Yes, I know it, but I can't edit revision at that case: I must
create backward mtn-diff for several files and create new revision
:( And for added/dropped files I should
11 matches
Mail list logo
