On 2/24/17 10:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
On 02/24/2017 02:36 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 16 January 2017 at 05:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
git worktree add ../9.6 REL9_6_STABLE
Does this do anythng different from the
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 02/24/2017 02:36 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> On 16 January 2017 at 05:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
>>> git worktree add ../9.6 REL9_6_STABLE
> Does this do anythng different from the git contrib script
>
On 02/24/2017 02:36 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 16 January 2017 at 05:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Not sure how many people still use [1], as referenced by our git wiki[2],
>> but it appears git worktrees are a viable replacement for that technique. In
>> short, if you're
On 16 January 2017 at 05:01, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Not sure how many people still use [1], as referenced by our git wiki[2],
> but it appears git worktrees are a viable replacement for that technique. In
> short, if you're already in your checkout:
>
> git worktree add
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 03:01:47PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Not sure how many people still use [1], as referenced by our git wiki[2],
>> but it appears git worktrees are a viable replacement for that technique. In
>> short, if you're already in your
On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 03:01:47PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Not sure how many people still use [1], as referenced by our git wiki[2],
> but it appears git worktrees are a viable replacement for that technique. In
> short, if you're already in your checkout:
>
> git worktree add ../9.6
Not sure how many people still use [1], as referenced by our git
wiki[2], but it appears git worktrees are a viable replacement for that
technique. In short, if you're already in your checkout:
git worktree add ../9.6 REL9_6_STABLE
would give you a checkout of 9.6 in the ../9.6 directory.