Hi folks,
Here is v3 of the preview-merge patch. This should have taken care of
the bits that Mosè found (thanks!). I have tested most release makefile
targets except:
* windows-package
- I don't have a windows machine to build and test with.
* release-upload
- I presume I don't have permi
Hi Matthew,
2014-11-18 21:50 GMT+01:00 Matthew Leach :
> Hi folks,
>
> Here is v3 of the preview-merge patch. This should have taken care of
> the bits that Mosè found (thanks!).
I'd like to review this patch, but I'm a bit busy for the time being.
If someone anticipates me in doing this is real
Mosè Giordano writes:
> Hi Matthew,
Hi Mosè,
>
>
> 2014-11-18 21:50 GMT+01:00 Matthew Leach :
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Here is v3 of the preview-merge patch. This should have taken care of
>> the bits that Mosè found (thanks!).
>
> I'd like to review this patch, but I'm a bit busy for the time being
2014-11-19 0:18 GMT+01:00 Matthew Leach :
> Mosè Giordano writes:
>
>> Hi Matthew,
>
> Hi Mosè,
>
>>
>>
>> 2014-11-18 21:50 GMT+01:00 Matthew Leach :
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> Here is v3 of the preview-merge patch. This should have taken care of
>>> the bits that Mosè found (thanks!).
>>
>> I'd like
> MG == Mosè Giordano [2014-11-19]
[...]
MG> I don't know, perhaps not to clutter the repo with non-essential
MG> stuff, though needed for the online manual.
I suggest to create a separated branch with this patch. You could then
rebase the branch as needed, as long as it's clearly document
Hi Davide,
2014-11-19 7:13 GMT+01:00 Davide G. M. Salvetti :
>> MG == Mosè Giordano [2014-11-19]
>
> [...]
>
> MG> I don't know, perhaps not to clutter the repo with non-essential
> MG> stuff, though needed for the online manual.
>
> I suggest to create a separated branch with this patch. Yo
> MG == Mosè Giordano [2014-11-19]
MG> 2014-11-19 7:13 GMT+01:00 Davide G. M. Salvetti :
[...]
>> I suggest to create a separated branch with this patch. You could
>> then rebase the branch as needed, as long as it's clearly documented
>> what the branch is for and that it will be rebased.
> DGMS == Davide G M Salvetti [2014-11-19]
[...]
DGMS> accordingly to Savannah's cgit global configuration, which I do
DGMS> now know.
s/now/not/
--
Sorry,
Davide
___
auctex-devel mailing list
auctex-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman
Hi Matthew,
patch installed, thanks!
Bye,
Mosè
2014-11-18 21:50 GMT+01:00 Matthew Leach :
> Hi folks,
>
> Here is v3 of the preview-merge patch. This should have taken care of
> the bits that Mosè found (thanks!). I have tested most release makefile
> targets except:
>
> * windows-package
>
Hi Davide,
2014-11-19 17:28 GMT+01:00 Davide G. M. Salvetti :
>> MG == Mosè Giordano [2014-11-19]
>
> MG> 2014-11-19 7:13 GMT+01:00 Davide G. M. Salvetti :
>
> [...]
>
>>> I suggest to create a separated branch with this patch. You could
>>> then rebase the branch as needed, as long as it's
Mosè Giordano writes:
>> BTW, while we are at it, simplify-TeX-parse-error looks like a
>> feature branch to me, and I personally find that continuous merges
>> with master hide the progress on that branch: I would prefer to see
>> it regularly rebased onto master, rather than merged, as the hist
Tassilo Horn writes:
> I'd be fine with merging simplify-TeX-parse-error into master (or just
> applying the diff onto master so that the merge commits don't make it
> into master's history) now, and then fix bugs there as they are
> encountered.
See the --squash option to git merge.
>From the m
"Nicolas Richard" writes:
>> I'd be fine with merging simplify-TeX-parse-error into master (or
>> just applying the diff onto master so that the merge commits don't
>> make it into master's history) now, and then fix bugs there as they
>> are encountered.
>
> See the --squash option to git merge.
> TH == Tassilo Horn [2014-12-3]
TH> Thus history is modified and I couldn't push my branch except with
TH> --force which would invalidate the branches people have based on my
TH> one.
If I know you will rebase your branch, I'll either avoid basing my own
branch on your branch or accept the
Tassilo Horn writes:
> Is that correct or am I missing something?
I think it's correct, but what I was saying is that you don't have to
"manually" apply the diff onto master : "git merge --squash" does that
for you. Sorry if I was unclear.
Sincerely,
--
Nicolas Richard
__
"Davide G. M. Salvetti"
writes:
> TH> Thus history is modified and I couldn't push my branch except with
> TH> --force which would invalidate the branches people have based on
> TH> my one.
>
> If I know you will rebase your branch, I'll either avoid basing my own
> branch on your branch
That's
> TH == Tassilo Horn [2014-12-4]
TH> "Davide G. M. Salvetti" writes:
[...]
>> or accept the burden of recovering from upstream rebase.
TH> Out of interest: how would you do that? Say, HEAD was commit foo, you
TH> added a bar commit on top, and now upstream has rebased so that foo is
TH>
"Davide G. M. Salvetti"
writes:
Hi Davide,
>>> or accept the burden of recovering from upstream rebase.
>
> TH> Out of interest: how would you do that? Say, HEAD was commit foo,
> TH> you added a bar commit on top, and now upstream has rebased so
> TH> that foo is gone and the new upstream HEAD
18 matches
Mail list logo
