hostname_cache bug in Query.pike

Would it be possible for someone to sneak in this bugfix in Query.pike at some stage? --- lib/modules/Protocols.pmod/HTTP.pmod/Query.pike.old 2007-04-15 14:24:41.0 +0200 +++ lib/modules/Protocols.pmod/HTTP.pmod/Query.pike2008-07-29 09:04:35.0 +0200 @@ -500,7 +500,9 @@

Re: Git

Martin B?hr wrote: On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 11:15:02PM +, Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote: g. Anyone having local branches which are based off of commits in the old git repository will have to rebase those How do you go about that? Manually rebasing every

Re: Git

Same question. More mature in which way? Git is maturing at an amazing rate (codebase wise), most open source projects either start with git or move from CVS or SVN to git these days. [citation needed] :-) What statistical material do you base this on?

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Same question. More mature in which way? Git is maturing at an amazing rate (codebase wise), most open source projects either start with git or move from CVS or SVN to git these days. [citation needed] :-) What

Re: Git

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 02:58:01PM +0200, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: - The percentage of people picking svn nowadays is roughly constant (after a sharp drop as git came along). that drop is actually in all packages, so i think it is just a case of changing the counting In any case, if

Re: Git

- Original Message From: Stephen R. van den Berg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 8:58:01 AM Subject: Re: Git Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Same question. More mature in which way? Git

Re: Git

Well, the user base of the tools doesn't necessarily reflect the distribution of repository types among projects. There only has to be one project which many are interrested in (say, the Linux kernel, a project which would be of special interrest to users of a Linux distibution such as Debian)

Re: Git

Lance Dillon wrote: Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Same question. More mature in which way? Git is maturing at an amazing rate (codebase wise), most open source projects either start with git or move from CVS or SVN to git these days. [citation

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Well, the user base of the tools doesn't necessarily reflect the distribution of repository types among projects. There only has to be Very true. The statistic shown is just that, a statistic, and since I don't have

Re: Git

The statistic shown is just that, a statistic, and since I don't have any others, that's all I can show. I know it's just as bad as most other statistics; the other information I have is even more vague than this silly graph. Fair enough. I was hoping for something more substantial since you

Re: Git

i think yes, and i think also ubuntu added it probably in april last year (which would explain the sudden drop around that time) greetings, martin.

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: accidental wording. The part I have a hard time believing is that most existing projects are switching to git. Even if a lot of projects are, there are tons of open source projects. sourceforge alone contains 290808

Re: Git

E.g. most GNU projects use git as their master repositories these days. Is there some statistics on e.g. Savannah to support this?

Re: Git

I pulled up the list of official GNU projects on Savannah (349 projects), and manually checked the first 25. CVS: 18 Git: 1 Both CVS and Git: 3 Both CVS and Svn: 1 No repository at savannah: 2 Still looks like CVS is in majority to me.

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: E.g. most GNU projects use git as their master repositories these days. Is there some statistics on e.g. Savannah to support this? Well, same thing here, in this case when I say most, I actually mean that I was looking

Re: Git

I also checked the latest 5 created official GNU projects: CVS: 1 Both CVS and Mercurial: 1 Both CVS and Subversion: 2 Both CVS and git: 1 A closer race, but only one for git and two for svn... :-)

Re: Git

Am I the only one who thinks this discussion really belongs elsewhere? Pros and cons about various VC systems as well as tutorials about their command-line flags feels very off-topic to me.

Re: Git

Well, we can of course make the repository switch without prior discussion. In that case I suppose we'd go a head with the (now several years old) plan to switch to svn.

Re: Git

Well, same thing here, in this case when I say most, I actually mean that I was looking at the page that lists the git projects, and most of the core GNU tools I still remember from long ago were on it. Ok, so you actually mean that most of the projects that use git are GNU projects? Looking at

Re: Git

Indeed.

Re: Git

Well, when facts which turn out to be unsubstantiated are brought here, it seems appropriate to scrutinize them, no?

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Well, we can of course make the repository switch without prior discussion. In that case I suppose we'd go a head with the (now several years old) plan to switch to svn. Switching to SVN is always better than

Re: Git

I see that the maintainer of diffutils is extra influential on you, since you list his/her project twice. :-)

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: I see that the maintainer of diffutils is extra influential on you, since you list his/her project twice. :-) Must be a woman then :-). Sorry, didn't notice that mistake until after sending. -- Sincerely,

Git repository bug

I found a bug in the git repository: git blame README-CVS gives the following output at the end: 9eb55816 (Mikael Brandström 2002-04-06 20:49:08 + 250) o A descripti 9eb55816 (Mikael Brandström 2002-04-06 20:49:08 + 251) o If you know 9eb55816 (Mikael Brandström

Re: Git

What? Last time I checked it did not have any version controlled meta data handling at all.

Re: Git

more mature in what sense? if everyone uses git on the client side then the maturity of svn on the server does not muy anything because you still have to deal with git. it only adds hassle which wouldn't exist otherwise. Same question. More mature in which way? Git is maturing at an

Re: Git

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 05:15:02PM +, Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote: But it is as you say: It is maturing very fast, hence it's not mature yet. I found several new and semi-essential features just by moving from the latest Ubuntu package to the latest upstream

Re: Git

i was including the price to actually implement the change in the repo. dump, edit, reload is way more expensive than fixing a comit and rebasing. greetings, martin.

Re: Git

Yes, but what was being talked about now was what people who had the repository checked out had to do. The cost to implement the change in the repo only has to be paid once, the cost to rebase needs to be paid for each checked out tree.

Re: Git

just out of curiosity which features are those for you? More subcommands to git-stash so that stashes actually get useful: Earlier the only option was to clear all of them or nothing, which means that one could only use them to very temporary things. Now I've got 12 stashes with assorted small

Re: Git

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 05:50:02PM +, Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote: More subcommands to git-stash so that stashes actually get useful: Earlier the only option was to clear all of them or nothing, which means that one could only use them to very temporary

Re: Git

Since the discussion is for/prior to switching repository, I actually do think it belongs in the developers forum... :p It's a bit TLDR though, can we have an executive summary when you're done?

Re: Git

Peter Bortas @ Pike developers forum wrote: What? Last time I checked it did not have any version controlled meta data handling at all. True. Personally I don't miss it, keeping the metadata accurate usually was more of a hassle than a feature to me (in SVN). I tended to create rules to

Re: Git

Another note of interest (not necessarily my view, but interesting enough to read, I'd think) with respect to metadata is: http://plasmasturm.org/log/487/ He's got a point that it's a good concept to track content without regard to the file that contains it, but that applies only to

Re: Git

Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote: make me newer ubuntu packages. I took a look at fixing so that the pager isn't used for short output though; it's annoying that git status has started to use the pager too all the time. Try: LESS=-inqMSFXx4 in your environment (or a

Re: Git

Peter Bortas @ Pike developers forum wrote: What? Last time I checked it did not have any version controlled meta data handling at all. Well, then it must be christmas :-)... man gitattributes reveals version controlled data handling (version controlled, because it is easily managed inside a

Re: Git

Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote: Yes, but what was being talked about now was what people who had the repository checked out had to do. The cost to implement the change in the repo only has to be paid once, the cost to rebase needs to be paid for each

Re: Git

That IS an improvement.

Re: Git

Try: LESS=-inqMSFXx4 in your environment (or a suitable subset), it solves that problem. More precisely, -F is the relevant flag. Unfortunately it doesn't work with -c. I've bug reported that. Still I think I'd prefer to configure git status to not use the pager at all. It's not quite the

Re: Git

Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS @ Pike developers forum wrote: Same question. More mature in which way? Git is maturing at an amazing rate (codebase wise), most open source projects either start with git or move from CVS or SVN to git these days. But it is as you say: It is maturing very fast,