On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 00:34, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * bc/sha-256 (2018-11-14) 12 commits
> - hash: add an SHA-256 implementation using OpenSSL
> - sha256: add an SHA-256 implementation using libgcrypt
> - Add a base implementation of SHA-256 support
> - commit-graph: convert to using the_hash
Am 09.01.19 um 01:44 schrieb Stephen P. Smith:
On Tuesday, January 8, 2019 2:27:22 PM MST Johannes Sixt wrote:
Am 31.12.18 um 01:31 schrieb Stephen P. Smith:
+
+TODAY_REGEX='[A-Z][a-z][a-z] [012][0-9]:[0-6][0-9] .0200'
The $...REGEX expansions must be put in double-quotes to protect them
fro
On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 00:23, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 5:56 AM Tomasz Śniatowski wrote:
> >
> > After upgrading to 2.20.1 I noticed in some submodule+worktree scenarios git
> > will break the submodule configuration. Reproducible with:
> > git init a && (cd a; touch a; git
Hi Ævar,
thanx very much for your detailed response. Exactly what I was
looking for.
Regards
Harri
Hello,
Sorry for the delay, it was due to fire disaster in our Zonal Office but
everything is okay now,I want to know if you still ready to work with us part
time or Full time ? Kindly get back to me Via email asap for details.
Email: humanresourcemanagermikemud...@gmail.com
Mike Murdock
If a tree has already been recorded as omitted, we don't need to
traverse it again just to collect its omits. Stop traversing trees a
second time when collecting omits.
Signed-off-by: Matthew DeVore
---
list-objects-filter.c | 18 --
t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects
Implement positive values for in the tree: filter. The
exact semantics are described in Documentation/rev-list-options.txt.
The long-term goal at the end of this is to allow a partial clone to
eagerly fetch an entire directory of files by fetching a tree and
specifying =1. This, for instance, wou
This applies suggestions from Jonathan Tan and Junio. These are mostly
stylistic and readability changes, although there is also an added test case
in t/t6112-rev-list-filters-objects.sh which checks for the scenario when
filtering which would exclude a blob, but the blob is given on the command
li
> On January 8, 2019 at 3:22 PM Jonathan Tan wrote:
>
>
> > > -static void filter_trees_update_omits(
> > > +static int filter_trees_update_omits(
> > > struct object *obj,
> > > struct filter_trees_depth_data *filter_data,
> > > int include_it)
> > > {
> > > if (!filter_data->omits)
> On January 8, 2019 at 3:39 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Also, the asterisk sticks to the variable, not type, i.e.
>
> struct filter_trees_depth_data *d = filter_data;
>
Fixed. Thanks.
On Tuesday, January 8, 2019 2:27:22 PM MST Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 31.12.18 um 01:31 schrieb Stephen P. Smith:
> > +
> > +TODAY_REGEX='[A-Z][a-z][a-z] [012][0-9]:[0-6][0-9] .0200'
> The $...REGEX expansions must be put in double-quotes to protect them
> from field splitting. But then the tests d
Thank you for the review :) See below.
On 2019/01/07 18:00, Jonathan Tan wrote:
-static void filter_trees_update_omits(
+static int filter_trees_update_omits(
struct object *obj,
struct filter_trees_depth_data *filter_data,
int include_it)
{
if (!filter_data->om
> 16657101...@163.com writes:
>
>> From: Sun Chao
>>
>> I'm particularly grateful to Junio and JiangXin for fixing the patches,
>> and I noticed Junio send a new commit to remove more unused codes and
>> suggest to SQUASH it.
>>
>> So I create this new version of patches to do this work, I also h
> Jonathan Tan writes:
>
> >> For your reference, here is an interdiff for this particular patch after
> >> applying your comments:
> >
> > The interdiff looks good, thanks. All my issues are resolved.
>
> Just to make sure. That's not "v2 is good", but "v2 plus that
> proposed update, when ma
Jonathan Tan writes:
>> +static void filter_trees_free(void *filter_data) {
>> +struct filter_trees_depth_data* d = filter_data;
>> +oidmap_free(&d->seen_at_depth, 1);
>> +free(d);
>> +}
>
> Check for NULL-ness of filter_data too, to match the usual behavior of
> free functions.
Also
Jonathan Tan writes:
>> For your reference, here is an interdiff for this particular patch after
>> applying your comments:
>
> The interdiff looks good, thanks. All my issues are resolved.
Just to make sure. That's not "v2 is good", but "v2 plus that
proposed update, when materializes, would
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 2:33 PM Josh Steadmon wrote:
>
> On 2018.12.29 13:19, Masaya Suzuki wrote:
> > By using and sharing a packet_reader while handling a Git pack protocol
> > request, the same reader option is used throughout the code. This makes
> > it easy to set a reader option to the reques
> > -static void filter_trees_update_omits(
> > +static int filter_trees_update_omits(
> > struct object *obj,
> > struct filter_trees_depth_data *filter_data,
> > int include_it)
> > {
> > if (!filter_data->omits)
> > - return;
> > + return 1;
> >
> > if
On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 5:56 AM Tomasz Śniatowski wrote:
>
> After upgrading to 2.20.1 I noticed in some submodule+worktree scenarios git
> will break the submodule configuration. Reproducible with:
> git init a && (cd a; touch a; git add a; git commit -ma)
> git init b && (cd b; git submod
> > Any reason for moving "case LOFS_BLOB" (and "case LOFS_BEGIN_TREE"
> > below) after LOFS_END_TREE?
>
> I put LOFS_BLOB and after LOFS_END_TREE since that is the order in all
> the other filter logic functions. I put LOFS_BEGIN_TREE at the end
> (which is different from the other filter logic
issac.tro...@gmail.com writes:
> From: Issac Trotts
Heh, I'll edit this line to match S-o-b: below.
>
> Make it possible to write for example
>
> git log --format="%H,%S"
>
> where the %S at the end is a new placeholder that prints out the ref
> (tag/branch) for each commit.
>
> Using %
After upgrading to 2.20.1 I noticed in some submodule+worktree scenarios git
will break the submodule configuration. Reproducible with:
git init a && (cd a; touch a; git add a; git commit -ma)
git init b && (cd b; git submodule add ../a; git commit -mb)
git -C b worktree add ../b2
g
Factor out the code that marks a cache entry as matched for checkout
into a separate function. We are going to introduce a new mode in
'git checkout' in a subsequent commit, that is going to have a
slightly different logic. This would make this code unnecessarily
complex.
Moving that complexity
In the previous patch we introduced a new no-overlay mode for git
checkout. Some users (such as the author of this commit) may want to
have this mode turned on by default as it matches their mental model
more closely. Make that possible by introducing a new config option
to that extend.
Signed-o
When marking cache entries for removal, and later removing them all at
once using 'remove_marked_cache_entries()', cache entries currently
have to be invalidated manually in the cache tree and in the untracked
cache.
Add an invalidate flag to the function. With the flag set, the
function will tak
Factor out the 'unlink_entry()' function from unpack-trees.c to
entry.c. It will be used in other places as well in subsequent
steps.
As it's no longer a static function, also move the documentation to
the header file to make it more discoverable.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer
---
cache.h
The key point for the if statement is that read_tree_some did not
update the entry, because either it doesn't exist in tree-ish or
doesn't match the pathspec. Clarify that.
Suggested-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer
---
builtin/checkout.c | 8
1 file changed, 4
'checkout_entry()' currently only supports creating new entries in the
working tree, but not deleting them. Add the ability to remove
entries at the same time if the entry is marked with the CE_WT_REMOVE
flag.
Currently this doesn't have any effect, as the CE_WT_REMOVE flag is
only used in unpack
Currently 'git checkout' is defined as an overlay operation, which
means that if in 'git checkout -- []' we have an
entry in the index that matches , but that doesn't exist in
, that entry will not be removed from the index or the
working tree.
Introduce a new --{,no-}overlay option, which allows
The 'git worktree' command used to be just another mode in 'git
checkout', namely 'git checkout --to'. When the tests for the latter
were retrofitted for the former, the test name was adjusted, but the
test number was kept, even though the test is testing a different
command now. t/README states:
Previous rounds are at <20181209200449.16342-1-t.gumme...@gmail.com>
and <20181220134820.21810-1-t.gumme...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Duy, Eric and Junio for comments on the previous round.
This round fixes some inconsistencies and improves the grammar in the
docs. Range-diff below:
1: fa450cda7c = 1
Jonathan Tan writes:
>> The in-core repository instances are passed through more codepaths.
>
> I think this is ready to be considered for merging to next. This series looks
> good both to Stolee [1] and to me (I replied to a previous version with
> comments on patch 18 [2] which Stefan has addr
Am 31.12.18 um 01:31 schrieb Stephen P. Smith:
+check_human_date () {
+ time=$1
+ expect=$2
+ test_expect_success "check date ($format:$time)" '
+ echo "$time -> $expect" >expect &&
+ TZ=${zone:-$TZ} test-tool date show:"$format" "$time" >actual &&
+
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:47 PM Markus Wiederkehr
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:43 PM Andreas Schwab wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 08 2019, Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
> >
> > > Would it be possible to retain this information?
> >
> > You could use the reflog of the current branch, where it is the se
> * sb/more-repo-in-api (2018-12-28) 23 commits
> - t/helper/test-repository: celebrate independence from the_repository
> - path.h: make REPO_GIT_PATH_FUNC repository agnostic
> - commit: prepare free_commit_buffer and release_commit_memory for any repo
> - commit-graph: convert remaining func
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 10:52:19AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano writes:
>
> > Jeff King writes:
> >
> >> Yeah, they should. I think one of them will need René's patch, which
> >> changes the body of quick_has_loose(). I can roll it as a separate topic
> >> if that's easier (or
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 12:38:26PM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote:
> > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> >
> > > From: Jonathan Tan
> >
> >
> > I was looking at the topics in 'pu' and noticed that I had v2 of
> > this series, wanted to update to v3, but major part of it was
> > superseded by anot
On Jan 08 2019, Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:43 PM Andreas Schwab wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 08 2019, Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
>>
>> > Would it be possible to retain this information?
>>
>> You could use the reflog of the current branch, where it is the second
>> entry.
>
> It i
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 6:43 PM Andreas Schwab wrote:
>
> On Jan 08 2019, Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
>
> > Would it be possible to retain this information?
>
> You could use the reflog of the current branch, where it is the second
> entry.
It is not, depending on what happens in the rebase it could
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
>
> > From: Jonathan Tan
>
>
> I was looking at the topics in 'pu' and noticed that I had v2 of
> this series, wanted to update to v3, but major part of it was
> superseded by another topic (jk/proto-v2-hidden-refs-fix). That
> leaves only this patch in the
16657101...@163.com writes:
> From: Sun Chao
>
> I'm particularly grateful to Junio and JiangXin for fixing the patches,
> and I noticed Junio send a new commit to remove more unused codes and
> suggest to SQUASH it.
>
> So I create this new version of patches to do this work, I also have
> check
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes:
> From: Jonathan Tan
I was looking at the topics in 'pu' and noticed that I had v2 of
this series, wanted to update to v3, but major part of it was
superseded by another topic (jk/proto-v2-hidden-refs-fix). That
leaves only this patch in the v3 of this series.
Hi
Thanks for reply, but sorry I don't know how to do that - I don't have the git
source code or know how to debug it.
Is there another way I can capture logging/debugging information while running
"git svn clone" and send it to you?
Thanks
Andrew Shearer / Web Developer
DDI 021 469 888 / and
On 2019/01/07 17:56, Jonathan Tan wrote:
case LOFS_END_TREE:
assert(obj->type == OBJ_TREE);
+ filter_data->current_depth--;
return LOFR_ZERO;
+ case LOFS_BLOB:
+ filter_trees_update_omits(obj, filter_data, include_it);
+
Junio C Hamano writes:
> Jeff King writes:
>
>> Yeah, they should. I think one of them will need René's patch, which
>> changes the body of quick_has_loose(). I can roll it as a separate topic
>> if that's easier (or just wait a week or so until René's cleanups
>> graduate).
>
> Nah, what I got
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" writes:
> From: Derrick Stolee
>
> Reported-by: Stefan Haller
> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee
> ---
Thanks.
> Documentation/git-gc.txt | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-gc.txt b/Documentation/git-gc.t
Andreas Hennings writes:
> I tried this option after upgrading my git.
> Unfortunately, no matter which variation I use, it still attempts to
> rebase most or all of the feature branches before merging them.
> Possibly depending on their ancestry.
Yes, I know that. But what I am hoping is that
Phillip Wood writes:
> I just wanted to check that these patches are on your radar as they
> haven't made it into pu yet.
Sorry, but they were not on my radar. I was waiting for comments to
come in on them before doing anything, and now it is more than a
month ago X-<.
On 1/8/2019 1:07 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King writes:
Yeah, they should. I think one of them will need René's patch, which
changes the body of quick_has_loose(). I can roll it as a separate topic
if that's easier (or just wait a week or so until René's cleanups
graduate).
Nah, what I g
Barret Rhoden writes:
>> A policy decision like the above two shouldn't be hardcoded in the
>> feature like this, but should be done as a separate option. By
>> default, these shouldn't be marked with '*', as the same tools you
>> said you are afraid of breaking would be expecting a word with on
I tried this option after upgrading my git.
Unfortunately, no matter which variation I use, it still attempts to
rebase most or all of the feature branches before merging them.
Possibly depending on their ancestry.
On Mon, 7 Jan 2019 at 22:12, Andreas Hennings wrote:
>
> It sounds good!
> I was
Jeff King writes:
> Yeah, they should. I think one of them will need René's patch, which
> changes the body of quick_has_loose(). I can roll it as a separate topic
> if that's easier (or just wait a week or so until René's cleanups
> graduate).
Nah, what I got is already good to work with. Both
On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 09:39:48AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > I skimmed them; they look good to me. 6 and 8 are particularly
> > satisfying; getting rid of hash copy operations just feels nice. :)
> >
> > Junio only took 1 to 5 into pu; 6, 7 and its sidekick 8, 10 and 11
> > conflict with s
On 2019-01-08 at 11:41 Barret Rhoden wrote:
> Would you be OK with
> also changing fsck to take a committish instead of a full SHA-1?
Actually, in retrospect, I can keep the unabbreviated SHA-1 for the
file inputs and use get_oid_committish() for the one-off --skip-rev=
cases.
Thanks,
Barret
Thomas Gummerer writes:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:34 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> * tg/checkout-no-overlay (2019-01-02) 8 commits
>> - checkout: introduce checkout.overlayMode config
>> - checkout: introduce --{,no-}overlay option
>> - checkout: factor out mark_cache_entry_for_checkout funct
Here is today's test coverage report.
Thanks,
-Stolee
[1] https://git.visualstudio.com/git/_build/results?buildId=290
---
pu: a5fd499f842ac17440e29bd610058ccdd3cf24a1
jch: 2ccddf26bf6308d5ea65fa26ffd7372d083bfc16
next: d81d796ee0c49eae40e3f85467a8e6b18022bcea
master: ecbdaf0899161c067986e9d9d5
On Jan 08 2019, Markus Wiederkehr wrote:
> During the rebase operation the original head seems to get stored in
> 'rebase-merge/orig-head'. Unfortunately this references gets removed
> after the rebase operation completes.
>
> Would it be possible to retain this information?
You could use the re
René Scharfe writes:
> Am 07.01.2019 um 09:31 schrieb Jeff King:
>> I also cleaned up my sha1/object_id patch and rebased it on top of what
>> you have here. Though as I worked on it, it expanded in scope a bit.
>> Possibly it should be a separate series entirely, but that would create
>> some an
Hi Junio,
Le 08/01/2019 à 00:34, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> * ag/sequencer-reduce-rewriting-todo (2018-11-12) 16 commits
> . rebase--interactive: move transform_todo_file() to rebase--interactive.c
> . sequencer: fix a call to error() in transform_todo_file()
> . sequencer: use edit_todo_list()
From: Sun Chao
I'm particularly grateful to Junio and JiangXin for fixing the patches,
and I noticed Junio send a new commit to remove more unused codes and
suggest to SQUASH it.
So I create this new version of patches to do this work, I also have
checked the left codes and remove a unused struc
From: Sun Chao
I'm particularly grateful to Junio and JiangXin for fixing the patches,
and I noticed Junio send a new commit to remove more unused codes and
suggest to SQUASH it.
So I create this new version of patches to do this work, I also have
checked the left codes and remove a unused struc
Thanks to Stefan Haller for sending me a private message about this typo.
Derrick Stolee (1):
git-gc.txt: fix typo about gc.writeCommitGraph
Documentation/git-gc.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
base-commit: c7e8ce6d1dd02f6569ea785eebc8692e8e2edf72
Published-As:
htt
From: Derrick Stolee
Reported-by: Stefan Haller
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee
---
Documentation/git-gc.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/git-gc.txt b/Documentation/git-gc.txt
index c20ee6c789..a7442499f6 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-gc.txt
From: Sun Chao
Remove unused functions to find `min` packs, such as `get_permutations`,
`pll_free`, etc.
Signed-off-by: Sun Chao
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano
---
builtin/pack-redundant.c | 86
1 file changed, 86 delet
On 2019-01-08 at 14:12 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 07 2019, Barret Rhoden wrote:
>
> > +static int handle_ignore_file(const char *path, struct string_list
> > *ignores)
> > +{
> > + FILE *fp = fopen(path, "r");
> > + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> > +
> > + if (!fp)
> >
Am 07.01.2019 um 09:31 schrieb Jeff King:
> I also cleaned up my sha1/object_id patch and rebased it on top of what
> you have here. Though as I worked on it, it expanded in scope a bit.
> Possibly it should be a separate series entirely, but that would create
> some annoying textual conflicts on m
On 2019-01-07 at 15:13 Junio C Hamano wrote:
> If I read it correctly, this gives a very limited form of -S, in the
> sense that anything this can do can be expressed by using -S but the
> reverse is not true, but is designed to be easier to use, in the
> sense that unlike -S, this does not have t
Hi Junio
I just wanted to check that these patches are on your radar as they
haven't made it into pu yet.
Best Wishes for the New Year
Phillip
On 23/11/2018 11:16, Phillip Wood wrote:
From: Phillip Wood
Thanks to Stefan for his feedback on v1. I've updated patches 2 & 8 in
response to tho
On Tue, Jan 08 2019, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> I wonder why git-lfs is needed to efficiently handle large files
> in git. Would it be reasonable to integrate this functionality
> into the native git?
>
> Please excuse me asking. I read some pretty scary articles about
> rewriting history, asking ev
Hi folks,
I wonder why git-lfs is needed to efficiently handle large files
in git. Would it be reasonable to integrate this functionality
into the native git?
Please excuse me asking. I read some pretty scary articles about
rewriting history, asking everybody to clone existing repositories
again
Hello,
I frequently run an interactive rebase to change the order of recent
commits, apply fixups, etc. When merge conflicts occur I often want to
compare the result with the original head prior to starting the
rebase.
In the past I used "git diff ORIG_HEAD". This used to work as long as
I did no
Alyssa Ross writes:
>> The commit the message shows is meant to indicate where your unnamed
>> branch diverged at named branches. Immediately after moving to the
>> unnamed branch by detaching the HEAD, the message says "at"; the
>> HEAD is pointing directly at the tip of the then-current branch
> The commit the message shows is meant to indicate where your unnamed
> branch diverged at named branches. Immediately after moving to the
> unnamed branch by detaching the HEAD, the message says "at"; the
> HEAD is pointing directly at the tip of the then-current branch and
> that is where the t
On Mon, Jan 07 2019, Jean-Noël AVILA wrote:
> Dear fellow translators,
>
> I'm trying to put up a longstanding project of providing translated manual
> pages for Git. After several experiments, the best choice seemed to be the use
> of po4a[1] to convert the asciidoc[2] sources of git manpages i
From: Issac Trotts
Make it possible to write for example
git log --format="%H,%S"
where the %S at the end is a new placeholder that prints out the ref
(tag/branch) for each commit.
Using %d might seem like an alternative but it only shows the ref for the last
commit in the branch.
Sig
On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 6:33 AM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> issac.tro...@gmail.com writes:
>
> > From: Issac Trotts
>
> I think you want to have
>
> From: Issac Trotts
>
> instead, so that the authorship actually matches your sign-off.
Makes sense. I'll do that.
>
> > - if (source) {
On Mon, Jan 07 2019, Barret Rhoden wrote:
> +static int handle_ignore_file(const char *path, struct string_list *ignores)
> +{
> + FILE *fp = fopen(path, "r");
> + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> + if (!fp)
> + return -1;
> + while (!strbuf_getline(&sb, fp)) {
>
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 4:44 PM Duy Nguyen wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 2:28 PM Anthony Sottile wrote:
> >
> > ```
> > git --version
> > rm -rf t
> > git init t
> > cd t
> > touch a
> > git add a
> > git commit -m "add a"
> > git rm a
> > touch a
> > git add --intent-to-add a
> > git status -
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 11:34 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * tg/checkout-no-overlay (2019-01-02) 8 commits
> - checkout: introduce checkout.overlayMode config
> - checkout: introduce --{,no-}overlay option
> - checkout: factor out mark_cache_entry_for_checkout function
> - checkout: clarify comme
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 2:28 PM Anthony Sottile wrote:
>
> ```
> git --version
> rm -rf t
> git init t
> cd t
> touch a
> git add a
> git commit -m "add a"
> git rm a
> touch a
> git add --intent-to-add a
> git status --short
> git reset -- a
"git reset" without "-- a" does remove intent-to-add st
80 matches
Mail list logo
