also sprach Joey Hess [2014-09-09 18:09 +0200]:
> You forgot to mention that you have (based on irc log) been using
> git annex forget. If anything is going to cause git-annex to lose
> location tracking information it would be that.
Good point. But on the upside of things, now I know a bit more
You forgot to mention that you have (based on irc log) been using
git annex forget. If anything is going to cause git-annex to lose
location tracking information it would be that.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
vcs-hom
also sprach Joey Hess [2014-09-09 17:31 +0200]:
> It does. Nowhere in your mail did you say you'd tried fsck.
Oh, because I thought it's run as part of repair. But looking again:
% git annex repair
Running git fsck ...
[…]
this is git-fsck, not git-annex-fsck ;)
--
@martinkrafft | http:
martin f krafft wrote:
> But why didn't fsck by itself fix this?
It does. Nowhere in your mail did you say you'd tried fsck.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
vcs-home mailing list
vcs-home@lists.madduck.net
http://lists.
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:09 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> But why didn't fsck by itself fix this?
I didn't recreate your situation, but I cron `git fsck; git annex
fsck` on _all_ my repos and, up to now, assumed `git annex fsck` did
everything --fast did.
Is `git annex fsck` the recommended "do a
also sprach Joey Hess [2014-09-09 16:46 +0200]:
> > Is there another way than drop/get on all files to restore this?
> > I've run "repair", "reinject" and "fix", but nothing seemed to fix
> > the problem.
>
> fsck --fast
This fixed it. Weird, as I always thought --fast would be a more
shallow ch
Hi,
On Tue 09/09/14,16:05, martin f krafft wrote:
> fishbowl:…ka/photos|master|2014.08.29% git annex get .
> # nothing happens
>
> So part of git-annex thinks the file is present and another thinks
> it's not…
>
> I have to drop/get and then it works:
>
> Is there another way than drop/get
martin f krafft wrote:
> The reason may be that I accidentally set trust=dead, but then
> changed it back to semitrusted.
That has nothing to do with location tracking, so I doubt it.
> Is there another way than drop/get on all files to restore this?
> I've run "repair", "reinject" and "fix", but
(here it is again -- to the list!)
Thanks Joey.
I still think it should be mentioned up front that the the 'add'
actually moves the file. It's a clear difference to how git works.
Interesting about direct mode; I hadn't heard of it and was about to
request such a feature!
Thanks Sean and Klaus t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Just a hint to eventually get your data back:
Am Mo den 10. Feb 2014 um 13:50 schrieb Matthew Hannigan:
> Next I reformated the disk, and get a funny feeling that the copy went
> a little too fast ...
Try to use some forensic tools. If you just for
Matthew Hannigan wrote:
> Anyway, time passes, and I decide to move all this content over to a
> different disk.
> I just used drag and drop from a gui (not sure whether windows or
> linux) and of course the select doesn't pick up the .git directory.
>
> Next I reformated the disk, and get a funny
I put this question forward on Ask Metafilter as well, and I got an
interesting way to do this. I thought I would share. (
http://ask.metafilter.com/249100/Can-a-Git-Branch-Contain-Only-a-Sub-Set-of-the-Repository)
The method involves first creating a branch to contain the "subset" of
files. In th
Happy to say I don't run windows anywhere.
Have you tried making a throw-away test repo and create some symlinks to
see how/if it all works?
On 26/09/2013 8:20 AM, "Dylan Kinnett" wrote:
> Does Git also handle symlinks well for Windows, does anybody know? I'm
> seeing quite a bit of conflicting
Git handles symlinks perfectly.
:-)
On 25/09/2013 2:38 PM, "Dylan Kinnett" wrote:
> That does sound delightfully simple. I just didn't know: how does Git
> handle symbolic links? Thanks for that suggestion. :)
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 12:35 AM, Olaf TNSB
> wrote:
>
> Couldn't you keep it really
Dylan Kinnett writes:
> Would it be better, then, to create a fork, instead of a branch? (I don't
> understand forks just yet.) In my situation here, I wouldn't want to treat
> the non-edited files as deleted although I would want to move the changes
> back to the master version, but also I also
Couldn't you keep it really simple, create a sub-directory, "anthology",
and use symbolic links to the files?
Olaf
On 25/09/2013 1:49 PM, "Dylan Kinnett" wrote:
> Would it be better, then, to create a fork, instead of a branch? (I don't
> understand forks just yet.) In my situation here, I woul
Would it be better, then, to create a fork, instead of a branch? (I don't
understand forks just yet.) In my situation here, I wouldn't want to treat
the non-edited files as deleted although I would want to move the changes
back to the master version, but also I also wouldn't want the sub-set to
con
Dylan Kinnett wrote:
> I hope this group is a good place to ask questions like this. I'm new to
> version control, but I'm quickly finding Git to be a great way to manage my
> collection of writings. I do have a question, though. I have, for example,
> a repository that contains 200 .txt files. Eac
Olivier Le Thanh Duong wrote:
> I recently started to use Git Annex to manage my photos archives, however
> at some point in time I mistakenly added some files in git before removing
> them and add them again in git-annex, however the problem is now that they
> are stuck in git history and any time
Hi,
it seems like i had the wrong adress for the zsh list. Please disregard
this mail and do not answer to it.
Sorry for the confusion.
V-
* Valentin Haenel [2012-05-26]:
> Hi,
>
> first, please excuse the posting, but I have something that might
> interest zsh people and also vcs-home people
Certainly not perfect but good enough:
CDDIR=$1
find $CDDIR -type f -print | while read F
do
# echo searching $F
FILENAME=$(basename "$F")
FOUND=$(find . -path .git -prune -o -name "$FILENAME" -print|head -n 1)
if [ -r "$FOUND" ]
then
echo found $FOUND
else
echo not found: $F
Thomas Koch wrote:
> first I just wanted to report that I have a git-annex repo that is really big
> and slow and that this makes me kind of unhappy. Then I realized, that it may
> be a good idea to add a "diagnostics" command to git-annex that will gather
> all informations useful for you to im
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 16:19, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Did you draw any conclusions from this? Thanks :)
I never got a definite answer, sorry.
Richard
___
vcs-home mailing list
vcs-home@lists.madduck.net
http://lists.madduck.net/listinfo/vcs-home
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Richard Hartmann
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 16:51, Joey Hess wrote:
>
>> joey@gnu:~/src/other/git>git ls-files --error-unmatch --others zlib.o zlib.c
>> zlib.o
>> error: pathspec 'zlib.c' did not match any file(s) known to git.
>> Did you forget to 'git add'
Adam Spiers wrote:
> OK. You mean this?
>
> http://git-annex.branchable.com/todo/parallel_possibilities/
More like this:
http://git-annex.branchable.com/todo/wishlist:_Prevent_repeated_password_prompts_for_one_command
> > You can enable ssh's connection sharing though. (ControlMaster)
>
>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Joey Hess wrote:
> Adam Spiers wrote:
>> One of my USB drives just died, so I'm doing a 'git annex get --not
>> --copies 1' to re-attain data redundancy. It seems that a new rsync
>> instance is invoked for each file? In my case, I have thousands of
>> photos whi
Adam Spiers wrote:
> One of my USB drives just died, so I'm doing a 'git annex get --not
> --copies 1' to re-attain data redundancy. It seems that a new rsync
> instance is invoked for each file? In my case, I have thousands of
> photos which are big enough to be worth annexing but still not
> in
Answering this one as I think this answers Sean's as well.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 10:21, Adam Spiers wrote:
> What would be "special" about such a remote?
Like other special git-annex remotes, it would not be a real git-annex
repo. Same as git-annex is able to use and track data in S3, bup,
HT
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Richard Hartmann
wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 20:44, Vincent Demeester wrote:
>
>> That also sound useful for me, and somehow with a similar use case (my
>> photography folder).
>
> I just realized that a special git remote may make more sense than a
> special
On 11 Jan 2012 at 20:06Z, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> I just realized that a special git remote may make more sense than a
> special bup remote.
> This is, after all, _exactly_ what we would need, in this case.
> If git-annex detects that it's being run in a "real" git repo, it
> could, hopefully,
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 20:44, Vincent Demeester wrote:
> That also sound useful for me, and somehow with a similar use case (my
> photography folder).
I just realized that a special git remote may make more sense than a
special bup remote.
This is, after all, _exactly_ what we would need, in t
On mer., janv. 11, 2012 at 12:56:49 +0100, Richard Hartmann wrote:
>
> Old data can be useful. Point in case, I may change GPS coordinates in
> EXIF data and correct timestamps based on that info. Maybe I will even
> correct white balance, etc. Still, I would want to keep full history
> forever in
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:39, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Is your point that a bup remote is persistent (i.e. not lossy) but
> does not track history
It does track history, but not in a format that is immediately accessible.
> whereas a normal annex is the opposite - lossy
> (when an annexed file's
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Richard Hartmann
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> while bup works as a special remote, it's not a proper repo in and as of
> itself.
>
> With proper tracking in the git-annex or a different branch, it should
> be possible to make (some) git-annex repos persistent and change
>
Olaf TNSB wrote:
> So I can manually edit 'remote/web' to change/remove urls?
Yes, although I recommend getting 3.20111211 before manually modifying
the git-annex branch.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
vcs-home mailing
Thanks for the quick reply! All my questions answered. :)
On 29/12/2011 2:54 AM, "Joey Hess" wrote:
>
> It does support storing multiple urls, and will try each until one
> works. I just don't have much of an interface for adding/removing the
urls.
>
> If you're using a backend like SHA1, then i
Olaf TNSB wrote:
> Hi joeyh and other annex-types,
>
> I've got a couple of questions regarding the web special remote in
> git-annex.
>
> Firstly, I was wondering if it was possible(*), or too technically
> difficult(!), to have multiple web remotes for files in an annex. For
> example, I can fi
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 16:51, Joey Hess wrote:
> joey@gnu:~/src/other/git>git ls-files --error-unmatch --others zlib.o zlib.c
> zlib.o
> error: pathspec 'zlib.c' did not match any file(s) known to git.
> Did you forget to 'git add'?
I am 99% sure this is a bug; investigating.
Richard
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 15:44, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > Since using git-ls-files is so convenient in most ways, all I can
> > think to do about this is document it.
>
> --error-unmatch ?
Produces a strange error message if run on files that are already in
git:
joey@gnu:
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 15:44, Joey Hess wrote:
> Since using git-ls-files is so convenient in most ways, all I can
> think to do about this is document it.
--error-unmatch ?
Richard
___
vcs-home mailing list
vcs-home@lists.madduck.net
http://lists.m
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 19:53, Joey Hess wrote:
> To follow-up, I have added a new one, called tweak-fetch. Hopefully it
> will be accepted into git in due course
Nice; thanks.
> I already have a tweak-fetch
> branch of git-annex that can use the hook to avoid any need of manually
> running `g
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 20:44, Richard Hartmann
> wrote:
> >> You need to run git annex merge before pushing and all will be well.
> > This seems to be a _very_ common problem for new users. I know it's a
> > message from git, not git-annex, but would there be any way t
Adam Spiers wrote:
> git annex add this_file_does_not_exist
>
> does not result in a warning. This leads to confusing (lack of)
> behaviour in certain cases, e.g.
>
> generate_a_list_of_files_some_of_which_contain_spaces | xargs git annex
> add
>
> would silently fail to add the files
Sean Whitton wrote:
> The only merge command I typed was “git annex merge”—surely that should
> do the right thing?
git-annex merge can't do this, but git merge git-annex certianly could..
> Is a revert, rebase or reset the best way to undo the damage I’ve done
> here?
Yes.
--
see shy jo
sig
On 17 Dec 2011 at 13:59Z, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> You merged the branches master and git-annex.
The only merge command I typed was “git annex merge”—surely that should
do the right thing?
Is a revert, rebase or reset the best way to undo the damage I’ve done
here?
> As a dirty hack to prevent
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 23:47, Sean Whitton wrote:
> After a recent pull/annex merge/push I noticed that my git-annex’d dir
> is filled with three character hex named folders, which contain more
> such folders, which contain log files named after my annex’d files (I
> think).
You merged the bran
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 20:44, Richard Hartmann
wrote:
> This seems to be a _very_ common problem for new users. I know it's a
> message from git, not git-annex, but would there be any way to display
> a hint?
As a follow-up, there are no hooks that could be used. Pity.
Richard
___
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 18:19, Joey Hess wrote:
> You need to run git annex merge before pushing and all will be well.
This seems to be a _very_ common problem for new users. I know it's a
message from git, not git-annex, but would there be any way to display
a hint?
Richard
__
David Edmondson wrote:
> Set the default upstream:
>
> laptop$ git branch master --set-upstream origin/master
> fatal: Not a valid object name: 'origin/master'.
> laptop$
>
> This fatal error seems to be the source of the later problems.
I've never needed to use --set-upstre
Sean Whitton wrote:
> On my second machine, my laptop, I don’t seem to be able to push to the
> centralised repository: I am getting the error one gets when one hasn’t
> yet done a pull and done a merge, but I definitely have:
> | ! [rejected]git-annex -> git-annex (non-fast-forward)
You
Adam Spiers wrote:
> I set up two git annex repos on the local machine which point to each
> other and then run git annex map, it chews up a load of CPU,
> presumably trying to traverse the cyclic repository graph without ever
> noticing there's a loop:
Fixed, it only happened when the repos refer
Adam Spiers wrote:
> $ git annex --help
> No manual entry for git-annex
>
> Is this issue related to the fact that I installed git-annex with cabal
> install?
Yes, as far as I know, cabal does not have a way to handle man pages.
"make install" does install one, that git brings up when you run t
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 21:21, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > It would be very weird to have a bup repository that is *not* bare.
>
> True; what I meant was the merged bup & annex, indeed.
>
> > As I said, it's probably possible to use a branch of the same repository
> > for b
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 21:21, Joey Hess wrote:
> It would be very weird to have a bup repository that is *not* bare.
True; what I meant was the merged bup & annex, indeed.
> As I said, it's probably possible to use a branch of the same repository
> for bup as for git-annex, but I'm not sure wh
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> The problem is that, afaik, I can't have it as a bare special remote.
It would be very weird to have a bup repository that is *not* bare.
> The use case is that I built & hosted a server for backups and backups
> only. As origin, it's used to sync git state between all o
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 19:04, Joey Hess wrote:
>> Sounds good. Would that cover the other noted limitations, as well?
>
> Unsure what you mean.
* I can not run git annex fsck (this might be addressed by Joey in code)
* Also, bare git annex repos only know about themselves and not other
repos. A
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 18:31, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> > I think this could be fixed fairly easily using the existing code to
> > list the keys in a non-checked out git branch.
>
> Sounds good. Would that cover the other noted limitations, as well?
Unsure what you mean.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 18:31, Joey Hess wrote:
> I think this could be fixed fairly easily using the existing code to
> list the keys in a non-checked out git branch.
Sounds good. Would that cover the other noted limitations, as well?
> It will defeat git-annex's location tracking so could le
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> * git annex status does not know about the global annex keys & size
I think this could be fixed fairly easily using the existing code to
list the keys in a non-checked out git branch.
> One thing I have been pondering is to create a local clone of the bare
> repo and sof
Also, bare git annex repos only know about themselves and not other
repos. Again, this is somewhat expected, but still.
The more I think about it, the more do I think that a combination of
object stores of bare & non-bare repos makes sense. Only need to
figure out the cleanest way to meld bup into
I don't understand all of them by looking at the names, but these
are ones that definitely exist on Windows:
>> changeWorkingDirectory
>> createLink
>> createSymbolicLink
>> executeFile
>> fileMode
>> fileSize
>> forkProcess
>> getAnyProcessStatus
>> getEffectiveUserID
>> getEnvDefault
>> getFileS
FYI, symlinks exist in Windows since ntfs 3.0 under the name of
"junctions", though only for directory targets.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_junction_point
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 11:45 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Alternatively, windows versions of these functions could be found,
> which are
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 18:43, Joey Hess wrote:
> Yes, fsck could check the size and checksum (if available). It could not
> check the location log correctness or number of available copies.
Sounds good to me. I am only concerned about data integrity, anyway.
> I prefer to track such stuff on
Richard Hartmann wrote:
> Hi all (i.e. Joey),
>
> git annex fsck
>
> is a no-op in a bare repository. While I can understand that there is
> no (easy) way to verify the symlinks, the annex objects are there
> regardless.
> Wouldn't it make sense to allow me to check repo integrity in bare
> rep
(forgot to Cc the list last time)
Joey Hess wrote:
> Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> > Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have been using git-annex for some time, and today while trying to
> > > issue `git annex get` it shows:
> > > get big_file (copying from host...) cp: unrecognized opt
Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been using git-annex for some time, and today while trying to
> > issue `git annex get` it shows:
> > get big_file (copying from host...) cp: unrecognized option '--reflink=auto'
> > Try `cp --help' for more information.
>
Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been using git-annex for some time, and today while trying to
> issue `git annex get` it shows:
> get big_file (copying from host...) cp: unrecognized option '--reflink=auto'
> Try `cp --help' for more information.
>
> The command was issued in a file ser
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:32, Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> Is there any workaround?
Is building your own coreutils or installing from Debian an option for you?
Richard
___
vcs-home mailing list
vcs-home@lists.madduck.net
http://lists.madduck.net/listi
Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been using git-annex for some time, and today while trying to
> issue `git annex get` it shows:
> get big_file (copying from host...) cp: unrecognized option '--reflink=auto'
> Try `cp --help' for more information.
>
For reference, I am using git-annex 0.
Alternatively, windows versions of these functions could be found,
which are all the ones that need POSIX, I think. A fair amount of this,
the stuff to do with signals and users, could be empty stubs in windows.
The file manipulation, particularly symlinks, would probably be the main
challenge.
ad
Moritz Bartl wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I love the idea of git-annex. Can you give me a hand to get it to work
> on Windows?
Well, I can tell you that it assumes a POSIX system, both in available
utilities and system calls, So you'd need to use cygwin or something
like that. (Perhaps you already are
Abhishek Dasgupta wrote:
> Is there any way to drop a whole annex at a go? One way is of course
> by going to the annex I want to drop and doing a 'git annex drop .'
>
> However, consider the hypothetical scenario: I have just lost my
> pendrive which had an annex; since I can't go back to it I ca
Well, you can use bzr's implementation of patience diff with git via the
GIT_EXTERNAL_DIFF environment variable, and newer versions of git have
their own implementation of patience diff that you can use with git diff
--patience, but these are for the git diff command only, not merging. To
get git t
Thanks all. Patience diff may be what I was looking for. I don't want to
patch git, but perhaps I can implement patience-diff in my merge driver.
I haven't tested but apparently bzr uses patience diff, it may be that
if I put my notes file in bzr it will just work.
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 12:01:16PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> > It’s really the diff algorithm that’s getting fouled up.
>
> > The solution is to use a better common marker than empty lines,
>
> Patience diff is probably a better solution. While git diff supports it,
>
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> It’s really the diff algorithm that’s getting fouled up.
> The solution is to use a better common marker than empty lines,
Patience diff is probably a better solution. While git diff supports it,
I don't know how to make it be used for a merge.
--
see shy jo
signa
* chombee [2010-04-25 16:40]:
> I was thinking that there should be some way to coerce git's
> merge algorithm into producing the results I want.
It’s really the diff algorithm that’s getting fouled up. Because
the empty lines are common to both copies of the file, it gets
hung up on using those
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 03:00:49PM +0100, chombee wrote:
> Yeah. I've been looking around, and it looks like there are a couple of
> options. You can get diff3 style or svn style merge conflicts, but
> neither seems like it will be any more useful. And you can provide your
> own program to carry ou
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 12:22:13PM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> Git (or the merge tool that git uses) doesn't know that those
> changes are unrelated. From its perspective, the top of the file
> has been added to with different sets of lines that should resolve
> to one change. It does its best,
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 09:16:20PM -0500, Chanoch (Ken) Bloom wrote:
> Since the order of the entries in the BibTeX file doesn't matter (each
> is identified by its key), I found a very simple solution: every time I
> add a new entry, I add it at a *random* location somewhere in the middle
> of the
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 19:31 +0100, chombee wrote:
> I'd like to keep a text file in my homedir called 'notes' which contains
> all my notes to myself, and track this file and sync it between
> computers using git. I write the file in markdown syntax and each new
> entry usually begins with a header
On 2010-04-23, chombee wrote:
> I'd like to keep a text file in my homedir called 'notes' which contains
> all my notes to myself, and track this file and sync it between
> computers using git. I write the file in markdown syntax and each new
> entry usually begins with a header. So on machine A I
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Manish [2008.07.30.1520 +0200]:
>> I am also new to git so just to confirm. Merge will leave us with one
>> less branch whereas a rebase will move our changes on top of the
>> changes of other branch. Right?
>
> N
"Rustom Mody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:19 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> > also sprach Rustom Mody:
> >> If I want to work on changes in the common part, I check out (a tag
> >> for) the point before the branch (as a detached head??)
> >> Work on that and then what?? T
also sprach Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.1520 +0200]:
> I am also new to git so just to confirm. Merge will leave us with one
> less branch whereas a rebase will move our changes on top of the
> changes of other branch. Right?
No, you'll have two branches in both cases. The distinction
2008/7/30 martin f krafft :
> also sprach Rustom Mody [2008.07.30.1322 +0200]:
>> If I want to work on changes in the common part, I check out (a tag
>> for) the point before the branch (as a detached head??)
>> Work on that and then what?? Thats my question.
>
> Don't you have a comm
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 5:19 PM, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> also sprach Rustom Mody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.1322 +0200]:
>> If I want to work on changes in the common part, I check out (a tag
>> for) the point before the branch (as a detached head??)
>> Work on that and th
also sprach Rustom Mody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.1322 +0200]:
> If I want to work on changes in the common part, I check out (a tag
> for) the point before the branch (as a detached head??)
> Work on that and then what?? Thats my question.
Don't you have a common branch, like master? You ca
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:47 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
> >> also sprach Rustom Mody [2008.07.30.0851 +0200]:
> >>> But how do I work on the base and have it push (yeah,
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:47 PM, martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Rustom Mody [2008.07.30.0851 +0200]:
>>> But how do I work on the base and have it push (yeah, that's not
>>> exactly the word) its changes through the (branches f
also sprach Rustom Mody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.1113 +0200]:
> >> But how do I work on the base and have it push (yeah, that's not
> >> exactly the word) its changes through the (branches for) Albert, Beth
> >> and Foo?
> >
> > You push them to a central location and they fetch&merge from t
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 12:47 PM, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> also sprach Rustom Mody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.0851 +0200]:
>> But how do I work on the base and have it push (yeah, that's not
>> exactly the word) its changes through the (branches for) Albert, Beth
>> and Foo
also sprach Rustom Mody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.07.30.0851 +0200]:
> But how do I work on the base and have it push (yeah, that's not
> exactly the word) its changes through the (branches for) Albert, Beth
> and Foo?
You push them to a central location and they fetch&merge from there,
or they fe
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:07:51PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> I have some minor comments on the code:
>
> > for repo in .fgits/*; do
>
> probably want to make this configurable...
Generally speaking, yes. But how? I mostly consider it a script for personal
use anyway ;)
> > if GIT_DIR=
The problem Max is trying to solve started with this post:
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=118407895625277&w=2
and was identified here:
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=118422647932244&w=2
I have some minor comments on the code:
> for repo in .fgits/*; do
probably want to make this configurable...
>
On Thu, 2008-02-21 at 15:52 +0530, Manish wrote:
> 2008/2/21 martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > also sprach Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.21.0811 +0100]:
> >
> > > > I personally prefer the mr tool to submodules for this task.
> > >
> > > Can you please share your .mrconfig?
> >
> >
also sprach Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.21.1122 +0100]:
> I wanted to know how you were using mr to manage submodules but like
> you said you are not. Guess I just need a clean layout.
Define "submodule"? I am using mr to manage my ~.
Please read
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_lo
2008/2/21 martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> also sprach Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.21.0811 +0100]:
>
> > > I personally prefer the mr tool to submodules for this task.
> >
> > Can you please share your .mrconfig?
>
> No, it contains sensitive information, like client names and the
also sprach Manish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.21.0811 +0100]:
> > I personally prefer the mr tool to submodules for this task.
>
> Can you please share your .mrconfig?
No, it contains sensitive information, like client names and the
like. What are you looking for anyway?
--
martin | http://m
also sprach Casey Link <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.02.20.2352 +0100]:
> Do you use the mr tool instead of git submodules?
Yes. See
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2007-09-06,Thu&sel=578#l979
--
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
"welcome to american air
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
