Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
>> I expect to rebase it against master.
>>
>> $ g shortlog HEAD ^master
>> build: use dist-xz, not dist-lzma
>> cleanup/modernize: don't test HAVE_MBRTOWC; now gnulib provides it
>>
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
> I expect to rebase it against master.
>
> $ g shortlog HEAD ^master
> build: use dist-xz, not dist-lzma
> cleanup/modernize: don't test HAVE_MBRTOWC; now gnulib provides it
> portability: accommodat
Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> Or just run "gitk next ^master" from a cloned directory.
>
> Ah ok, that's probably fine.
> I assumed the commits where inconspicuous among the
> other commits and ordered on their original commit dates.
> But I think they will be tagged as "next", and that
> you've only ac
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Pádraig Brady wrote:
>
>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
>>> I expect to rebase it against master.
>> Would you like others to push desired changes there
>> for review?
>
> Sure, if you or Eric are interested, but first I'll have t
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
>> I expect to rebase it against master.
>
> Would you like others to push desired changes there
> for review?
Sure, if you or Eric are interested, but first I'll have to adjust
the server-side update
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
> I expect to rebase it against master.
Would you like others to push desired changes there
for review?
>
> $ g shortlog HEAD ^master
It would be nice to have the web interface highlight
these changesets in some way.
che
I've pushed a few changes to a new "next" branch.
I expect to rebase it against master.
$ g shortlog HEAD ^master
build: use dist-xz, not dist-lzma
cleanup/modernize: don't test HAVE_MBRTOWC; now gnulib provides it
portability: accommodate gnulib's getaddrinfo change
