Re: I just pulled, and git log --graph does not show all

> Anyway, in your first email you asked how you can merge that branch > into 'master'. The command 'git merge origin/strings' will "merge" it > without actually creating a merge commit, because 'strings' builds > entirely on top of 'master'; this is what Git calls a "fast-forward >

Re: I just pulled, and git log --graph does not show all

>>> "SG" == SZEDER Gábor writes: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 09:13:56AM +0300, Uwe Brauer wrote: >> Could you please try out >> git clone https://git.code.sf.net/p/matlab-emacs/src matlab-emacs-hg > This repository contains two branches: 'm

Re: I just pulled, and git log --graph does not show all

> On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 12:22:27PM +0200, Uwe Brauer wrote: > I hear you: I had a brief encounter with Mercurial not that long ago, > and there were several things that didn't work the way I expected (or > rather: the way I got used to with Git). The sub

I just pulled, and git log --graph does not show all

for this behavior. How can I now merge the new branch into master? Thanks Uwe Brauer

Re: [problem with name-rev]

> That's it, thanks. Interestingly enough the > git graph looks differently from the mercurial one. It does not. I just did not understand the git commands at first sight well enough. Both graphs look the same. Sorry for the noise.

Re: [problem with name-rev]

> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 12:35 PM Uwe Brauer wrote: > Try adding '--all' to include all refs, not just the current HEAD, to > begin logging from. Here is what I see after running your setup > script. > $ git log --graph --dec

Re: [problem with name-rev]

>>> "JCH" == Junio C Hamano writes: > Uwe Brauer writes: >> Gives >> * changeset: ae68dbe:master >> |\ user: Uwe Brauer >> | | date: Tue Aug 20 16:25:53 2019 +0200 >> | | summary: 1.2.1/1.1 >> | | &

[problem with name-rev] (was: git log --graph with a sort of local revision number)

mat='%C(auto)changeset: %h:%H%nuser: %an%ndate: %ad%nsummary: %s%n' | git name-rev --refs=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD) --name-only --stdin | more Gives * changeset: ae68dbe:master |\ user: Uwe Brauer | | date: Tue Aug 20 16:25:53 2019 +0200 | | summary:

[SOLVED] (was: git log --graph with a sort of local revision number)

>>> "UB" == Uwe Brauer writes: >>> "RA" == Rafael Ascensão writes: >> You can achieve something close (on small repos, more on that later) with: >> $ git log --graph --color \ >> --format='%C(auto)changeset: %h:%H%nuser:

Re: git log --graph with a sort of local revision number

; | git name-rev --refs=$(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD) --name-only --stdin Ok I see this is bash syntaxes. In that case it works, but I see * changeset: f40c01e:f40c01e41afbb87c7321147242354d46ddaee231 | user: Uwe Brauer | date: Thu Aug 15 15:13:00 2019 +0200 | summary:

Re: git log --graph with a sort of local revision number

>>> "RA" == Rafael Ascensão writes: > You can achieve something close (on small repos, more on that later) with: > $ git log --graph --color \ > --format='%C(auto)changeset: %h:%H%nuser: %an%ndate: %ad%nsummary: %s%n' \ > | git name-rev --refs=$(git rev-parse --abbrev

git log --graph with a sort of local revision number

22c31 | tag: tip | user: Uwe Brauer | date:Wed Aug 14 14:23:29 2019 +0200 | summary: Six | o changeset: 4:64a3eee07e93 | user: Uwe Brauer | date:Wed Aug 14 14:23:28 2019 +0200 | summary: Fifth Anybody know who to achieve it? I presume