On Wed, 22 Jan 2020, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> We're missing a statement on the main news feed about the git transition.
Lovely, thanks.
Gerald
PS: Lovely referring to you creating the patch, not the missing
announcement. ;-)
On Wed, 22 Jan 2020, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> We're missing a statement on the main news feed about the git transition.
Lovely, thanks.
Gerald
PS: Lovely referring to you creating the patch, not the missing
announcement. ;-)
We're missing a statement on the main news feed about the git transition.
diff --git a/htdocs/index.html b/htdocs/index.html
index 41bcfe18..ef85cc97 100644
--- a/htdocs/index.html
+++ b/htdocs/index.html
@@ -54,6 +54,10 @@ mission statement.
News
+GCC source repository converted to git
We're missing a statement on the main news feed about the git transition.
diff --git a/htdocs/index.html b/htdocs/index.html
index 41bcfe18..ef85cc97 100644
--- a/htdocs/index.html
+++ b/htdocs/index.html
@@ -54,6 +54,10 @@ mission statement.
News
+GCC source repository converted to git
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 01:31:13PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Why would people want to name their local branches "me/thing" instead
of just "thing", btw?
it’s a way of making things distinct and allows the push rule to be
present for
On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 01:31:13PM +, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Why would people want to name their local branches "me/thing" instead
> > of just "thing", btw?
>
> it’s a way of making things distinct and allows the push rule to be present
> for them
> but absent
On 1/11/20 10:54 AM, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
On 11/01/2020 15:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
Hi Richard,
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
and vendor branches I've written some
Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
>> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>>
>> It would be helpful if
On 11/01/2020 15:41, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
>> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
>> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>>
>> It would
Hi Richard,
On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:50:03PM +, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
> Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
> and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
>
> It would be helpful if someone could do some experiments to ensure
On 09/01/2020 16:50, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote:
Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
It would be helpful if someone could do some experiments to ensure that
what I've written works properly
Given the proposed intention to use non-standard refspecs for private
and vendor branches I've written some notes on how to use these.
It would be helpful if someone could do some experiments to ensure that
what I've written works properly for all versions of git, not just the
one I have
Unfortunately a family emergency has cropped up and I can’t respond directly to
the thread. I’m also unlikely to be able to follow up on this discussion in
the next couple of days.
I proposed the timetable back after the Cauldron to make it clear that we were
serious about moving this release
13 matches
Mail list logo
