git format-patch
Hi Gábor!
On 10/20/19 1:37 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:38:40PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
>> The testsuite is failing again on s390x and all other big-endian targets in
>> Debian. For a full build log on s390x see [1].
>
> Gah, my p
targets in
Debian. For a full build log on s390x see [1].
Adrian
> [1]
> https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=git&arch=s390x&ver=1%3A2.24.0%7Erc0-1&stamp=1571440098&raw=0
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
`-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Hello get back to me urgently
such as sparc64 can be retrieved through
the gcc compile farm [1].
Thanks,
Adrian
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/CompileFarm
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
`-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
ing a copy.
**
-Original Message-
From: Elijah Newren
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 4:13 PM
To: McRoberts, John
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: -EXT-Re: Problem with git diff
WARNING: This message is from an external source. Evaluate the message
carefu
I am responsible for generating a list of all files changed between two
successive releases of software. I was using 'git diff' but have run into a
problem.
Consider the following situation: A development branch comes off of commit A
and files are changed three times. A tag (REL1) is placed on th
empty lines even if
hints are presented.
John Lin (1):
status: remove the empty line after hints
t/t7060-wtstatus.sh| 5
t/t7508-status.sh | 62 --
t/t7512-status-help.sh | 14 --
wt-status.c| 4 ---
4 files changed, 85 dele
From: John Lin
Before this patch, there is inconsistency between the status
messages with hints and the ones without hints: there is an
empty line between the title and the file list if hints are
presented, but there isn't one if there are no hints.
This patch remove the inconsisten
From: John Lin
Before this patch, there is inconsistency between the status
messages with hints and the ones without hints: there is an
empty line between the title and the file list if hints are
presented, but there isn't one if there are no hints.
This patch remove the inconsisten
empty lines even if
hints are presented.
John Lin (1):
status: remove the empty line after hints
t/t7060-wtstatus.sh| 5
t/t7508-status.sh | 62 --
t/t7512-status-help.sh | 14 --
wt-status.c| 4 ---
4 files changed, 85 dele
ve case and some
similar cases.
Signed-off-by: John Lin
---
t/t7500-commit-template-squash-signoff.sh | 1 +
t/t7508-status.sh | 5 +
t/t7512-status-help.sh| 1 +
wt-status.c | 12
4 files changed, 15 inser
ve case and some
similar cases.
Signed-off-by: John Lin
---
wt-status.c | 12
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
index 445a36204a..0766e3ee12 100644
--- a/wt-status.c
+++ b/wt-status.c
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static void wt_longstatu
wondering if there is interest, or if anybody has thoughts on the
notation?
Thanks,
John
Sir/madam,I humbly seek your consent for an investment in your
Country.I need your good advice and suggest areas of sustainable and
viable economy that will be of great value to us.More details of this
will be sent following your INVESTMENT suggestions.Regards,
On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 9:20 PM brian m. carlson
wrote:
>
> I think we should just ask Homebrew to ship a functional, complete Git.
They are doing just that:
https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/pull/35446
If for some reason this patch doesn't make it in, I'll keep bugging
them about it, but
On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 2:19 PM William Hubbs wrote:
>
> The author.email, author.name, committer.email and committer.name
> settings are analogous to the GIT_AUTHOR_* and GIT_COMMITTER_*
> environment variables, but for the git config system. This allows them
> to be set separatel
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:10 PM John Passaro wrote:
> All seems to work fine when I treat %Gs as a detached signature.
In light of this, my best guess as to why the cleartext PGP message
didn't verify properly is that the commit data normally doesn't end
with \n, but as far as I can
I recently submitted my first patch using OSX and found the experience
frustrating, for reasons that have come up on the list before,
concerning git-send-email and perl dependencies that you need to be
root to update.
Last seen here:
https://public-inbox.org/git/878t55qga6@evledraar.gmail.com/
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 6:10 PM John Passaro wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 11:07 -0500, John Passaro wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 11:12 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > > >
> > > &
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 11:49 AM Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2018-12-14 at 11:07 -0500, John Passaro wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 11:12 PM Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 16:22 -0500, John Passaro wrote:
> > > > Currently
On Fri, Dec 14, 2018 at 4:08 PM Mr&Mrs D wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I maintain a python project you can clone from:
>
> g...@github.com:wrye-bash/wrye-bash.git
>
> For reasons unknown git sees a particular file as changed
> (Mopy/Docs/Bash Readme Template.html, sometimes others too). This file
> was p
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018, Oliver Joseph Ash wrote:
> I believe I have found a bug in `git commit --fixup`.
>
> Steps to reproduce:
> 1. Create a git history with two commits (A and B) with the same
> commit message (e.g. foo)
> 2. Create a new commit using `git commit --fixup {SHA}`, referring to
> th
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 11:12 PM Michał Górny wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 16:22 -0500, John Passaro wrote:
> > Currently, users who do not have GPG installed have no way to discern
> > signed from unsigned commits without examining raw commit data. I
> > prop
Clarify description of %G? = "U" to say it can mean good signature but
untrusted key.
Make wording consistent between %G* placeholders and other placeholders
by removing the verb "show".
Signed-off-by: John Passaro
---
Documentation/pretty-formats.txt | 13 +++-
en, git complains to
stderr that GPG cannot be found. That commit included low-level tests
for this behavior. Now, test it also at the level of everyday user
commands.
Signed-off-by: John Passaro
---
Documentation/pretty-formats.txt | 6 +-
t/t7510-signed-commit.sh | 95 +++
Add new pretty-format placeholders %GR and %G+ to support inspecting
gpgsig commit header in pretty format, even if GPG is not available.
Signed-off-by: John Passaro
---
Documentation/pretty-formats.txt | 2 ++
pretty.c | 36 ++--
2 files
ersion of this branch based on that branch
as well, so you can use that in case conflicts with aw/pretty-trailers
arise.
See:
- https://github.com/jpassaro/git/tree/jp/pretty-expose-gpgsig
-
https://github.com/jpassaro/git/tree/jp/pretty-expose-gpgsig--based-on-aw-pretty-trailers
John Passa
Test that %GR output ("Raw" contents of "gpgsig" header) looks like
ASCII-armored GPG signature.
Test %G+ (Y/N for presence/absence of "gpgsig" header) by adding it to
existing format tests for signed commits.
Signed-off-by: John Passaro
---
.
V/R
John Lopez
Systems Engineer
edural question: I'd like to reference this patch in one of
my own. Can I reference it as I typed it above? Or is there a chance
of the SHA1 changing before it goes into some sort of a main history?
John Passaro
(917) 678-8293
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:50 AM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Joh
I'd be very grateful if somebody on this list could tell me whether I
can count on this behavior in the future, or whether my code should
account for a possibility that this behavior could change in the future.
I'd also be very very interested to see in what commit(s) this change
occurred.
Thanks in advance!
John Passaro
(917) 678-8293
orepo, which I've seen applied
at a former employer, versus continuous delivery. That's due to lack of
personal familiarity with CD -- not any real objections.
Thanks,
John
On 12/06/2018 03:08 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Jeff King wrote:
>
(*) and we don't break object storage and
>> communication. Of course pack delta compression becomes absolutely
>> useless. But that is perhaps an acceptable trade off.
> Right, this is another option, but from what John described wouldn't
> work in this case. "
amounts of data in the repo -- git gets that right, and perforce (our
status quo) does not. That's how I got onto the idea of adding read
authorization to git.
Thanks,
John
Hi all,
I’m using vim DirDiff plugin to compare 2 branches. This works great for the
most part except:
When I compare a branch to the current branch (git difftool -t vimDirDiff
--dir-diff master)
If there is a file that exists in $LOCAL that is not in $REMOTE I copy the file
into $REMOTE, bu
your FAMILY.
Regards
John William
Hello ,
My name is Sgt Major John Dailey. I am here in Afghanistan , I came
upon a project I think we can work together on. I and my partner (1st
Lt. Daniel Farkas ) have the sum of $15 Million United State Dollars
which we got from a Crude Oil Deal in Iraq before he was killed by an
explosion
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:58 PM Taylor Blau wrote:
> I'm replying to this part of the email to note that this would cause Git
> LFS to have to do some extra work, since running 'git lfs install'
> already writes to .git/hooks/post-commit (ironically, to detect and
> unlock locks that we should ha
That might help avoid integration issues.
> we strictly avoid using CGo
What's the main reason for this? Build system complexity?
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:37 AM Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 12:53:58PM -0700, John Austin wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 1
Regarding integration into LFS, I'd like to build the library in such
a way that it would easy to bundle with LFS (so they could share the
same git hooks), but also make it flexible enough to work for other
workflows.
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 12:53 PM John Austin wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:57 AM Randall S. Becker
wrote:
> I would even like to help with your effort and have non-unixy platforms I'd
> like to do this on.
> Having this separate from git LFS is an even better idea IMO, and I would
> suggest implementing this using the same set of build tools
I've been putting together a prototype file-locking implementation for
a system that plays better with git. What are everyone's thoughts on
something like the following? I'm tentatively labeling this system
git-sync or sync-server. There are two pieces:
1. A centralized repository called the Globa
n a
bit.
- JA
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 7:55 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 15 2018, Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 02:09:12PM -0700, John Austin wrote:
> >> I've been working myself on strategies for handling binary conflicts,
>
> Right, though this still subjects the remote copy to all of the
> difficulty of packing large objects (though Christian's work to support
> other object database implementations would go a long way to help this).
Ah, interesting -- I didn't realize this step was part of the
bottleneck. I presume
> There's also the nascent "don't fetch all the blobs" work-in-progress
> clone mode which might be of interest to you:
> https://blog.github.com/2018-09-10-highlights-from-git-2-19/#partial-clones
Yes! I've been pretty excited about this functionality. It drives a
lot of GVFS/VFS for Git under th
into the commit/branching model of git). I've got to a loose
design that I like, but it'd be good to get some feedback, as well as
hearing what other game devs would want in a binary conflict system.
- John
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:00 PM Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>
into the commit/branching model of git). I've got to a loose
design that I like, but it'd be good to get some feedback, as well as
hearing what other game devs would want in a binary conflict system.
- John
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:00 PM Taylor Blau wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
&
Hey all,
I've been putting together a working group for game studios wanting to
use Git. There are a couple of blockers that keep most game and media
companies on Perforce or others, but most would love to use git if it
were feasible.
The biggest tasks I'd like to tackle are:
- improvements to l
. Should you be
interested to engage us for a more detailed discussion on the aforementioned
proposal, we would be happy to do so in whatever medium you find much more
appropriate for this engagement.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Nicholas John Edwards.
Independent broker.
Email
h to recognize it's there
already & leave the path unmodified (sorry, I know that's 2 different bugs in 1
email, but they are related).
John Meyer
Technical Lead, ZeroChaos
jme...@zerochaos.com
Disclaimer: This email is intended only for the use of the party to which it is
address
Complete the --color-moved option wherever we complete --diff-algorithm.
Signed-off-by: John Marshall
---
Complete this recently-added option in a slightly over-the-top number of
places. Patch based on the maint branch.
Cheers,
John
contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 24
git-LFS or just adding support for
it and I'll still need to install git-lfs afterwards?
Thanks,
John
ments are mine, and describe the
conditions on which I first saw the problem. I'll warn you, it's weird.
Thank you,
John Chesshir
P.S. I also found this older post, which appears related, but has clearly been
fixed:
https://superuser.com/questions/1114193/when-cloning-on-with-git-
funds daily.
Remember to send him your Full information to avoid wrong transfer such as:
Receiver's Name___
Address:
Country:
Phone
Number: _
I.D
Card:_
Though, I, John Fleming have sent $5000 in your name today So contac
I used Git-2.16.2-64-bit.exe to install. I used all defaults except for editor,
where I chose Notpad++.
John
-Original Message-
From: Bryan Turner
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 3:22 PM
To: Briggs, John
Cc: Jonathan Nieder ; git@vger.kernel.org;
git-for-wind...@googlegroups.com
;run as administrator" checked on both shortcut
and the program (or any combo of).
John
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Nieder
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 2:53 PM
To: Briggs, John
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org; git-for-wind...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: getting fatal error trying to
Got it figured out. Git gui must be ran as administrator.
John
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Nieder
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2018 1:58 PM
To: Briggs, John
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org; git-for-wind...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: getting fatal error trying to open git gui
Hi,
Briggs
I just installed git for windows 10 and am getting "git-gui: fatal error"
"Cannot parse Git version string.
When I execute "git version" in the command prompt I get
Git version 2.16.2.windows.1
Everything else seems to be working. How can I get the gui to work?
John
akley wrote:
> From: "John Cheng"
>
>> I am experiencing a strange behavior and I'm not certain if it is a
>> problem with golang or the cygwin version of git.
>>
>> Steps to reproduce:
>> Use golang's os/exec library to execute
>> ex
s git
Expected result:
commit 09357db3a29909c3498143b0d06989e00f5e2442
Author: John Cheng
Date: Sun Jan 14 10:57:01 2018 -0800
...
Actual result:
Suppose that cygwin git is specified, the result becomes:
exit status 128 fatal: ambiguous argument '@u': unknown revision or
path not in
what is in
>> +the index). Similarly, copied and renamed entries cannot appear if
>> +detection for those types is disabled.
>
> Makes sense; thanks.
--
---
John L Cheng
some trial and error, I found
that git-ls-files gave me what I needed. However, I wanted to point
out why I initially believed git-diff-files with show "added files".
Think of this more as user feedback.
On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Cheng writes:
>
&
pares the files in the working tree and the index. When paths
are specified, compares only those named paths. Otherwise all
entries in the index are compared. The output format is the
same as for 'git diff-index' and 'git diff-tree'. Files not in the index are
not compared.
--
---
John L Cheng
I have a business proposal 15,500,000 GBP.
tus
--porcelain --ignored` and examining the output? I'm not sure how
well that would work with directories.
Thanks for the insight Junio. I'm going to let the exit status thing
drop for now. You don't seem like it's a good thing to do, and I'm
not particularly fond of having it behave two different ways based on
`-v` being present.
-John
direct about testing this. I
imagine what happened is that gitignores used to contain only things
you wanted to ignore and when the ability to negate came along the
semantics of this was never changed--and possibly for good reason.
I'm just wondering if it should change, or if the documentation should
be updated to reflect how it actually behaves (the file may not be
ignored, but a line is present in a gitignore that affects its
status). The behavior is definitely a little unexpected as it stands,
given the documentation though.
Thanks for taking a look Philip!
-John
sn't true here).
Thoughts? It seems like this question was asked before several years
ago but didn't get a response.
Thanks!
-John
PS The SO question is here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45210790/how-to-reliably-check-whether-a-file-is-ignored-by-git
-Original Message-
>From: Jeff King
>Sent: Jul 15, 2017 12:05 PM
>To: John J Foerch
>Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [FEATURE] git-commit option to prepend filename to commit message
>
>On Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 10:19:34AM -0400, John J Foerch wrote:
>
&
Perfect, thank you Hannes!
-Original Message-
>From: Johannes Sixt
>Sent: Jul 15, 2017 12:01 PM
>To: John J Foerch
>Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [FEATURE] git-commit option to prepend filename to commit message
>
>Am 15.07.2017 um 16:19 schrieb John J F
with commit message from editor:
: pre-fill commit message template with ": "
- commit affecting multiple files:
: use common base directory of all affected files for , behaviors
as above for use with -m or editor.
Anybody think that this or something like it would be a good
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 6:28 AM, John Shahid wrote:
>> bump. it's been a while and I'm still not clear what the next steps
>> are. I'm happy to send a patch but I would like to get a consensus
>> first.
bump. it's been a while and I'm still not clear what the next steps
are. I'm happy to send a patch but I would like to get a consensus
first.
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:50 AM, John Shahid wrote:
> Hi Jonathan. Thanks a lot for the detailed and interesting response. I
>
corrected
3. I propose more changes to the git tools to support the unity view of the repo
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> John Shahid wrote:
>
>> It looks like the git push recurse-submodules behavior has changed.
>> Currently with 2.13
al path) to not propagate the
refspec and preserve the current behavior. Judging from the code and a
test case that I wrote, this behavior is working as expected. That is,
git won't propagate the refspec.
Cheers,
JS
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Sun, May 28, 20
Hi all,
It looks like the git push recurse-submodules behavior has changed.
Currently with 2.13 you cannot run "git push
--recurse-submodules=on-demand" if the parent repo is on a different
branch than the sub repos, e.g. parent repo is on "develop" and
sub-repo on "master". I created a test that
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 04:15:42AM -0500, John Szakmeister wrote:
>
>> > I did notice another interesting case when looking at this. Fsck ends up
>> > in fsck_loose(), which has the sha1 and path of the loose object. It
On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Dennis Kaarsemaker
wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 07:50 -0500, John Szakmeister wrote:
>> I was perusing StackOverflow this morning and ran across this
>> question:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/41521143/git-fsck-full-only-checking-
On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 12:26 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 10:47:03PM +0100, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote:
>> On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 07:50 -0500, John Szakmeister wrote:
>> > I was perusing StackOverflow this morning and ran across this
>> > question:
&g
be here, but my expectation is that if `git fsck` says
everything is okay, then all operations using that object (file)
should work too.
Is that unreasonable? What would be the impact of fixing this issue?
-John
e".
Thank you both for your prompt and exhaustive answers.
j.
On 28/12/16 08:52, Jeff King wrote:
On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 08:42:25AM +, John P. Hartmann wrote:
This project is hosted on github. If I put the hook into the repository
manually (if I can; I don't know t
wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 09:32:22PM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 5:34 PM, John P. Hartmann wrote:
I would like a hook in .got/hooks to be made available to all who clone or
pull a particular project. I'd also like the hook to be under git control
(changes co
I would like a hook in .got/hooks to be made available to all who clone
or pull a particular project. I'd also like the hook to be under git
control (changes committed &c). I added a hook, but git status does not
show it. Presumably git excludes its files in .git/ from version
control lest t
On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 08:14:58PM +, Larry Minton wrote:
> My question:
>
> Let's say I have a code change that I want to 'bake' for a while
> locally, just to make sure some edge case doesn't pop up while I am
> working on other things. Is there any practical way of doing that? I
> could c
Yes that makes sense.
I was not aware of custom merge drivers, but indeed that may address
my situation. I'll look into it.
Thanks!
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Rood writes:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:57 AM, John Rood wrote:
>>>
Is there any push-back on this, or is there a backlog that we can add
this feature to?
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:57 AM, John Rood wrote:
> If the contents of a file initially are:
> one
>
> three
> and on branch A there is a commit, removing the blank line:
> one
>
my test.sln files, but just one of
> them?
src/ is not under version control, and currently git does not descend
into unknown folders to remove ignored files. If you had a tracked or
staged file in src/, then git would descend into src/ and remove
test.sln as expected. In your example, try doing:
$ touch src/foo.c
$ git add src/foo.c
$ git clean -dXf
Removing src/test.sln
Removing test.sln
Hope that helps!
-John
If the contents of a file initially are:
one
three
and on branch A there is a commit, removing the blank line:
one
three
and on branch B there is a commit, adding 'two':
one
two
three
Normally, if you try to merge A into B (or B into A), git recognizes a
decision needs to be made bet
away from leaving messages at
all.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Rood writes:
>
> [administrivia: do not top post]
>
>> What I'm really seeking is not a make-shift solution for myself, but
>> an intuitive solution for the novice user-ba
What I'm really seeking is not a make-shift solution for myself, but
an intuitive solution for the novice user-base at large.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Rood writes:
>
>> I suppose I can do git config --global core.editor notepad
>> Ho
, the user isn't issuing the "git commit" command, and so
he/she doesn't have the opportunity to use the -m flag.
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM, John Rood wrote:
>> Users should be able to configure Git to not
Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:05 PM, John Rood wrote:
> Unfortunately, in my case I'm on windows (my company's choice, not mine).
>
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM, John Rood wrote:
>>> Users should be able to con
Unfortunately, in my case I'm on windows (my company's choice, not mine).
On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM, John Rood wrote:
>> Users should be able to configure Git to not send them into a Vim editor.
>
> See htt
Users should be able to configure Git to not send them into a Vim editor.
When users pull commits, and a new commit needs to be created for a
merge, Git's current way of determining a commit message is to send
the user into a Vim window so that they can write a message. There are
2 reasons why thi
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 01:07:00PM +0200, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 01:02:28PM +0200, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 05:50:28PM +0200, Jonas Thiel wrote:
> > > A while ago I have described my problem with Homebrew at the following
> > > GitHub channel
On 9/10/16, Jakub Narębski wrote:
> You would need post-checkout hook together with clean / smudge filters
> (though you could get by without smudge filter, at least in theory...).
> The `post-checkout` hook could run e.g. "git checkout -- '*.conf'"
> to force use of smudge filter, after checking
On 9/10/16, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> The clean and smudge operations should look _only_ at the contents
> they are filtering, and nothing else, and the clean/smudge filtering
> mechanism is designed to support that use case. It is not designed
> to do things like embedding the name of the branch t
On 9/8/16, Jakub Narębski wrote:
> W dniu 06.09.2016 o 23:01, john smith pisze:
>
>> I'd prefer smudge/clean filters instead of `make' scripts etc. to
>> convert template dotfiles into something usable and back because
>> filters:
>>
>> 1. could be
On 9/6/16, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 06.09.16 19:47, john smith wrote:
>> I am looking for a way to force smudge filter to run by simulating a
>> real life checkout. Let's say I just created a new branch and did not
>> modify any files but want to test my new s
1 - 100 of 1191 matches
Mail list logo
