On Sunday 22 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 07:40:17PM CEST:
> > This problem indicates that `git --dry-run' is not enough for me
> > to check the correctness of the push; do you know if there is a
> > way to show which commits are added to w
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 07:40:17PM CEST:
> This problem indicates that `git --dry-run' is not enough for me to
> check the correctness of the push; do you know if there is a way to
> show which commits are added to which branches during a push
> (while still in `dry-run'
On Saturday 21 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 01:49:37PM CEST:
> > On Saturday 21 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > FWIW, somehow you managed to apply these two patches separately
> > > to each of these branches, instead of merging th
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 01:49:37PM CEST:
> On Saturday 21 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > FWIW, somehow you managed to apply these two patches separately to
> > each of these branches, instead of merging them all from maint.
> Ouch, that's true... how could this be
On Saturday 21 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:14:03PM CEST:
> > Applied to maint, merged in master and branch-1.11, and pushed.
>
> FWIW, somehow you managed to apply these two patches separately to
> each of these branches, instead of me
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:14:03PM CEST:
>
> Applied to maint, merged in master and branch-1.11, and pushed.
FWIW, somehow you managed to apply these two patches separately to each
of these branches, instead of merging them all from maint.
I'm fixing the merges with the
At Wednesday 18 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>>> OK for maint if you agree.
>> I agree, and I think I should add your name to the ChangeLog
>> entry. OK?
> No need, but do however pleases you.
I added your name too, since the wording which went into the manual
is basically yours (and much be
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:05:25PM CEST:
> So is:
> * doc/automake.texi (Automatic dependency tracking): Fix typo.
> acceptable?
Sure.
> > OK for maint if you agree.
> I agree, and I think I should add your name to the ChangeLog entry.
> OK?
No need, but do however pl
At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:29:51PM CEST:
> > From ef90f67c33297b361ac9630fd5fa8be5d2e463d5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001 From: Stefano Lattarini
> > Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:23:47 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Fix ty
[ dropped automake@ ]
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:29:51PM CEST:
> From ef90f67c33297b361ac9630fd5fa8be5d2e463d5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Stefano Lattarini
> Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:23:47 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Fix typo in manual (`Makefile.in' instead of
[From a discussion on autom...@gnu.org]
At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> On 08/17/10 13:26, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> >> I would like to test a new special-purpose compiler
> >> (which is part of a bigger project) using the
11 matches
Mail list logo
