Hi Luis and Hannes,
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 09:35:56AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 17.08.2016 um 08:46 schrieb David Aguilar:
> > The only thing that using diff-files doesn't address is the
> > rerere support in mergetool where it processes the files in
> > the order specified by "git rerere
Am 17.08.2016 um 08:46 schrieb David Aguilar:
The only thing that using diff-files doesn't address is the
rerere support in mergetool where it processes the files in
the order specified by "git rerere remaining". This is why I
initially thought we needed a generic sort-like command.
I see. Thi
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 08:10:46AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 17.08.2016 um 08:05 schrieb Johannes Sixt:
> > Am 17.08.2016 um 03:25 schrieb David Aguilar:
> > > Hmm, I do like the idea of reusing the diff orderFile, but a
> > > mechanism for sorting arbitrary inputs based on the orderFile
> >
Am 17.08.2016 um 08:05 schrieb Johannes Sixt:
Am 17.08.2016 um 03:25 schrieb David Aguilar:
Hmm, I do like the idea of reusing the diff orderFile, but a
mechanism for sorting arbitrary inputs based on the orderFile
isn't currently exposed in a way that mergetool could use it.
Instead of using
Am 17.08.2016 um 03:25 schrieb David Aguilar:
Hmm, I do like the idea of reusing the diff orderFile, but a
mechanism for sorting arbitrary inputs based on the orderFile
isn't currently exposed in a way that mergetool could use it.
Instead of using 'git ls-files -u | sed ... | sort -u' you could
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 09:19:35PM +0100, Luis Gutierrez wrote:
> > Thoughts? Would you be interested in helping work up a patch
> > for this idea? At a minimum we should also write a test case in
> > t/t7610-mergetool.sh to verify that it works as advertised.
>
> > Why not reuse the existin
> Thoughts? Would you be interested in helping work up a patch
> for this idea? At a minimum we should also write a test case in
> t/t7610-mergetool.sh to verify that it works as advertised.
> Why not reuse the existing diff.orderFile config variable? (Also
> supported by the -O option to g
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 08:42:21PM -0700, David Aguilar wrote:
> This use case makes me wonder whether the sorting we do here is
> something that should be opened up a bit so that the it's not
> quite so set in stone.
>
> For example, an extension to the approach taken by this patch
> would be to
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 11:14:28AM +0100, Luis Gutierrez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Attached is a potential patch for reversing the order on which
> git-mergetool presents the files to merge.
>
> Currently, when running git-mergetool, it performs a sort of the files
> to merge by alphabetical ordering. Whe
Hi,
Attached is a potential patch for reversing the order on which
git-mergetool presents the files to merge.
Currently, when running git-mergetool, it performs a sort of the files
to merge by alphabetical ordering. When working on C, this has the
annoying effect of presenting the merge for a .c*
10 matches
Mail list logo
