34PM +0200, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 14:57 -0500, Elliott Cable wrote:
>> > > Presumably this isn't intended behaviour?
>> >
>> > It actually is. git-submodule sets GIT_PROTOCOL_FROM_USER to 0, which
>> > makes git no
Set up `persistent-https` as described in the [README][]; including the
‘rewrite https urls’ feature in `.gitconfig`:
[url "persistent-https"]
insteadof = https
[url "persistent-http"]
insteadof = http
Unfortunately, this breaks `git submodule add`:
> git submodule ad
oh, wow, this got over my head *real* fast. Okay,
1. Yeah, my `$GIT_WORK_TREE` was def. an absolute path; I typed that
example code without running it *precisely* that way (entirely my
mistake! I'm so sorry for the confusion it caused, and all that typing
you did!); if I remember correctly (not at
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Elliott Cable wrote:
> So, I find this behaviour a little strange; I can't determine if it's
> a subtle bug, or intentionally undefined/‘fuzzy’ behaviour ...
Oh lord, it gets worse ...
$ cd a-repo
$ git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree; git rev-p
So, I find this behaviour a little strange; I can't determine if it's
a subtle bug, or intentionally undefined/‘fuzzy’ behaviour:
$ cd a-repo/.git/
$ pwd
/path/to/a-repo/.git
$ git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree
false
$ export GIT_WORK_TREE=/path/to/a-repo
$ git rev-pa
So, `git help rev-parse` [mentions the following][rev-parse], as of
2.8.0:
--git-dir
Show $GIT_DIR if defined. Otherwise show the path to the .git
directory. The path shown, when relative, is relative to the
current working directory.
However, when inside a symlinked repo
I'm not sure what version the `%>` / `<|` / etc padding showed up in,
but they're truly excellent for building beautiful one-line `git log`
output.
This may be a long-shot, but, unfortunately, these new formats sort of
fall flat in the presence of `git log --graph`: The ‘pad until column’
feature,
So, I've spent some time in the #git channel on Freenode chatting
about this, and we couldn't figure it out. I can't reproduce it in a
newly-made repository, but it's reproducible with the repository I've
been working in.
> git status
On branch Master
Your branch is ahead of 'ec/Master
hink it'd be relevant.
I feel like an idiot. Forgive me. I'll --signoff my next version of
the patch. o7
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Elliott Cable writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> elliottcable writes
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> elliottcable writes:
>> Thus, I've added an --authorship-order version of --date-order, which relies
>> upon the AUTHOR_DATE instead of the COMMITTER_DATE; this means that old
>> commits
>> will continue to show up chronologically in-order
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> After reading the subject alone, my reaction was "is this sorting
> commits by the name of the author"?
>
> That is one of the expected natural reactions when people hear about
> this option, which is not what you want.
>
> Perhaps naming it
I use a fairly complex `git-log` command involving `--date-order` to
get an overview of my repository's status; but unfortunately,
`--date-order` seems to use the *committer* date, not the *author*
date. That means that each time I bring my topic branches up to date
by rebasing them onto the curren
12 matches
Mail list logo
