Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 01:31:13PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Why would people want to name their local branches "me/thing" instead
of just "thing", btw?
it’s a way of making things distinct and allows the push rule to be
present for the
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 01:31:13PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Why would people want to name their local branches "me/thing" instead
> > of just "thing", btw?
>
> it’s a way of making things distinct and allows the push rule to be present
> for them
> but absent f
On 1/11/20 10:54 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 11/01/2020 15:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi Richard,
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
and vendor branches I've written some
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
>> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>>
>> It would be helpful if someon
On 11/01/2020 15:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
>> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>>
>> It would b
Hi Richard,
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>
> It would be helpful if someone could do some experiments to ensure
On 09/01/2020 16:50, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
It would be helpful if someone could do some experiments to ensure that
what I've written works properly f
