Re: Request re git status

On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:46:53 -0800 Ron Pero wrote: [...] > Still, one way or another, it was easy to feel tripped up by that and > some kind of verbal cue could help. > I wonder if this kind of message would help: Latest fetch: {timestamp} [...] Timestamps have little to no

Re: Request re git status

Hi Phil Thanks very much for your reply. I do understand why git status should not automatically fetch from the server. The solution is that I become aware of that nuance (yes, I am fairly new to git) and conduct myself that way. Still, one way or another, it was easy to feel tripped up by that

[PATCH v2] Document the --no-gui option in difftool

Prior to this, the `--no-gui` option was not documented in the manpage. This commit introduces this into the manpage Signed-off-by: Denton Liu --- Documentation/git-difftool.txt | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git

Re: idea: light-weight pull requests

On Tue, 2017-02-07 at 03:11 +, Eric Wong wrote: > How would discussion and review happen?  People seem to use > either mail, or centralized messaging (and the latter often > involves non-Free systems like GitHub or Slack). It would depend on the setup for the particular repo. Information

Re: idea: light-weight pull requests

Paul Wise wrote: > Hi all, > > I had an idea that might be interesting to git folks: > > light-weight pull requests: > > Anonymous and ssh/http-identified users should be able to push just > using git, within the refs/pull/ namespace, to any non-existent branch > name or

Re: idea: light-weight pull requests

On Mon, 2017-02-06 at 19:57 -0500, Santiago Torres wrote: > IMHO, the notion of a PR/MR is more specific to Git repository > management tools (e.g., GitHub, GitLab). They all have specific > concepts/ways to manage the way how their hosted repositories behave --- > and I believe this flexibility

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2017, #02; Mon, 6)

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:24 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: >> * sg/completion-refs-speedup (2017-02-06) 13 commits >> - squash! completion: fill COMPREPLY directly when completing refs >> - completion: fill COMPREPLY directly when completing refs >> - completion: list only

Re: git-daemon shallow checkout fail

Bob Proulx wrote: > 17:20:40.590177 pkt-line.c:46 packet:clone< > 34e7202270c381f4e5734180dc19426ce69f2e1e HEAD\0multi_ack thin-pack side-band > side-band-64k ofs-delta shallow no-progress include-tag multi_ack_detailed > symref=HEAD:refs/heads/master agent=git/1.9.1 The

Re: idea: light-weight pull requests

Hello, pabs. IMHO, the notion of a PR/MR is more specific to Git repository management tools (e.g., GitHub, GitLab). They all have specific concepts/ways to manage the way how their hosted repositories behave --- and I believe this flexibility is one of the beauties in Git . I could see how this

idea: light-weight pull requests

Hi all, I had an idea that might be interesting to git folks: light-weight pull requests: Anonymous and ssh/http-identified users should be able to push just using git, within the refs/pull/ namespace, to any non-existent branch name or to a branch they created when previously identified,

Re: Request re git status

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 3:36 PM Ron Pero wrote: > I almost got bit by git: I knew there were changes on the remote > server, but git status said I was uptodate with the remote. > Do you mean you almost pushed some changed history with "--force" which would have lost others'

Re: git-daemon shallow checkout fail

Duy Nguyen wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > It depends on the git version on the server. The interesting code is in > > upload-pack.c, which is spawned by git-daemon to serve a fetch or clone > > request. > > > > See commit b790e0f67 (upload-pack: send shallow info over stdin to > > pack-objects,

Re: git-daemon shallow checkout fail

Hello Johannes, Thank you very much for the good hints here. They are very helpful. Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Assuming that you can rebuild your Git with debug symbols and without > optimization (simply remove the -O2 from CFLAGS in the Makefile, I never > had any luck with single-stepping

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2017, #02; Mon, 6)

> * sg/completion-refs-speedup (2017-02-06) 13 commits > - squash! completion: fill COMPREPLY directly when completing refs > - completion: fill COMPREPLY directly when completing refs > - completion: list only matching symbolic and pseudorefs when completing refs > - completion: let

Re: Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu`

Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:48:20PM +, Eric Wong wrote: > > > I haven't hit insurmountable performance problems, even on > > low-end hardware; especially since I started storing blob ids in > > Xapian itself, avoiding the expensive tree lookup via git. > >

Re: [PATCH 00/12] completion: speed up refs completion

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:36 AM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: >>> I haven't had a chance to further investigate, but I tried

Request re git status

Hi I almost got bit by git: I knew there were changes on the remote server, but git status said I was uptodate with the remote. This page explains it well. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27828404/why-does-git-status-show-branch-is-up-to-date-when-changes-exist-upstream That page also

Re: [PATCH/RFC] WIP: log: allow "-" as a short-hand for "previous branch"

Siddharth Kannan writes: > Hey Junio, I did some more digging into the codepath: > ... > In case you would prefer for me to not work on this anymore > because I am new to the codebase, I will leave it at this. The above is nicely analized and summarized. The

Re: [PATCH] Completion: Add support for --submodule=diff

Hi, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Peter Law writes: > >>> Teach git-completion.bash about the 'diff' option to 'git diff >>> --submodule=', which was added in Git 2.11. >> >> I posted this patch back in December, but I've not heard anything. I'm >> sure as

What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2017, #02; Mon, 6)

Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with '+' are in 'next'. The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them. You can find the changes

[PATCH v4] tag: generate useful reflog message

From: Cornelius Weig Thanks for taking a look at my last version. > On the other hand, it's not like failing to describe the tagged > commit in the reflog is such a grave error. If we can get away with > being vague on a tag that points at an object of unknown type

[PATCH v4] tag: generate useful reflog message

From: Cornelius Weig When tags are created with `--create-reflog` or with the option `core.logAllRefUpdates` set to 'always', a reflog is created for them. So far, the description of reflog entries for tags was empty, making the reflog hard to understand. For example:

Re: Git clonebundles

Christian Couder writes: > There is also Junio's work on Bundle v3 that was unfortunately > recently discarded. > Look for "jc/bundle" in: > > http://public-inbox.org/git/xmqq4m0cry60@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com/ > > and previous "What's cooking in git.git"

Re: Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu`

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 08:48:20PM +, Eric Wong wrote: > I haven't hit insurmountable performance problems, even on > low-end hardware; especially since I started storing blob ids in > Xapian itself, avoiding the expensive tree lookup via git. The painful thing is traversing the object graph

Re: git/git-scm.com GH Issue Tracker

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 12:49:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Of course, that will make it easier to let broken objects created by > newer reimplementations of Git (and bugs in our code that cause us > to create such broken objects) go unnoticed, so we would want to > keep them at warn (not

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] completion bash: add more options and commands

cornelius.w...@tngtech.com writes: > From: Cornelius Weig > > This is the re-roll of patch series > <2017015724.19360-1-cornelius.w...@tngtech.com>. > > This patch series adds all long-options that are mentioned in the synopsis of > the man-page for the

Re: [PATCHv2 00/21] completion: various __gitdir()-related improvements

SZEDER Gábor writes: > This is a long overdue reroll of a bunch of bugfixes, cleanups and > optimizations related to how the completion script finds the path to > the repository and how it uses that path. Most importantly this > series adds support for completion following

Re: git/git-scm.com GH Issue Tracker

Jeff King writes: > [1] If we had a more permissive set of defaults, it would probably make > sense to turn on fsckObjects by default. Some of the checks are > security-relevant, like disallowing trees with ".GIT", > "../../etc/passwd", etc. Those _should_ be handled

Re: Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu`

Johannes Schindelin wrote: > For details, see: > http://public-inbox.org/git/11340844841342-git-send-email-mailing-lists@rawuncut.elitemail.org/ > (this is also an example where public-inbox' thread detection went utterly > wrong, including way too many mails in

Re: warning in tree xxx: contains zero-padded file modes

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 02:23:37PM -0600, Samuel Lijin wrote: > >> There are some discussions in the past [1] [2] about this. > > I think you forgot to link to [2] :p I think the [1] [2] there were recursive quotes from Duy's email. Those footnotes were: [1]

Re: warning in tree xxx: contains zero-padded file modes

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 2:23 PM, Samuel Lijin wrote: > I'm just going to go ahead and split this off the git/git-scm.com > issues thread since this is a distinct topic. > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Jeff King wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 05:18:03PM

warning in tree xxx: contains zero-padded file modes

I'm just going to go ahead and split this off the git/git-scm.com issues thread since this is a distinct topic. On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 05:18:03PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Samuel Lijin

Re: [PATCH 00/12] completion: speed up refs completion

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:31 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: >> I haven't had a chance to further investigate, but I tried this series >> out (from your github) and it appears that this series (or the >>

Re: [PATCH v3] tag: generate useful reflog message

cornelius.w...@tngtech.com writes: > + strbuf_addstr(sb, " ("); > + type = sha1_object_info(sha1, NULL); > + switch (type) { > + default: > + strbuf_addstr(sb, _("internal object")); > + break; The code does not even know if this is an "internal" object,

Re: Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu`

Johannes Schindelin writes: > So I thought maybe the From: line (from the body, if available, otherwise > from the header) in conjunction with the "Date:" header would work. FYI, I use a post-applypatch hook to populate refs/notes/amlog notes tree when I queue a new

Re: [PATCH] Document the --no-gui option in difftool

Denton Liu writes: > diff --git a/Documentation/git-difftool.txt b/Documentation/git-difftool.txt > index 224fb3090..a2661d9cc 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-difftool.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-difftool.txt > @@ -87,9 +87,11 @@ instead. `--no-symlinks` is the default

Re: git/git-scm.com GH Issue Tracker

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 12:15:08AM -0600, Samuel Lijin wrote: > I've went through a bunch of open issues on the git/git-scm.com repo > (specifically, everything after #600) and I think the bulk of them can > be closed. > > I've taken the liberty of classifying them as shown below. Thanks, this

Re: [PATCH 00/12] completion: speed up refs completion

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: > I haven't had a chance to further investigate, but I tried this series > out (from your github) and it appears that this series (or the > previous series for __gitdir work) breaks "git log" ref completion. > I'll have

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 03:33:50AM +0100, Jeff King wrote: > We (the Git project) got control of the git-scm.com domain this year. We > have never really had an "official" website, but I think a lot of people > consider this to be one. > > This is an overview of the current state, as well as

[PATCH] squash! completion: fill COMPREPLY directly when completing refs

Care should be taken, though, because that prefix might contain 'for-each-ref' format specifiers as part of the left hand side of a '..' range or '...' symmetric difference notation or fetch/push/etc. refspec, e.g. 'git log "evil-%(refname)..br'. Doubling every '%' in the prefix will prevent 'git

Re: [PATCH v3] parse-remote: remove reference to unused op_prep

Siddharth Kannan writes: > Hey Pranit, > On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 02:45:46AM +0530, Pranit Bauva wrote: >> Hey Siddharth, >> >> On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Siddharth Kannan >> wrote: >> > The error_on_missing_default_upstream

Re: [PATCH] difftool: fix bug when printing usage

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> +test_expect_success 'basic usage requires no repo' ' >> +lines=$(git difftool -h | grep ^usage: | wc -l) && >> +test "$lines" -eq 1 && > > It may be easier to debug future breakages if you wrote > > git difftool -h | grep

Re: [PATCH/RFC] WIP: log: allow "-" as a short-hand for "previous branch"

Hey Junio, I did some more digging into the codepath: On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 04:15:03PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > A correct solution needs to know if the argument is at the position > where a revision (or revision range) is expected and then give the > tip of the previous branch when it

Re: [PATCH 00/13] gitk: tweak rendering of remote-tracking references

On 2016-12-19 11:44 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote: This patch series changes a bunch of details about how remote-tracking references are rendered in the commit list of gitk: I don't see this series in git v2.12.0-rc0, nor in Paul's gitk repo. I hope this is an oversight, and not that the series

Re: subtree merging fails

Hi Stavros, On Mon, 6 Feb 2017, Stavros Liaskos wrote: > Please check this issue for a description of the bug: > https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/issues/896#issuecomment-277587626 Just an observation from my side: if I see a request for help on this mailing list where the sender merely

Re: [PATCH] difftool: fix bug when printing usage

Hi David, On Sun, 5 Feb 2017, David Aguilar wrote: > "git difftool -h" reports an error: > > fatal: BUG: setup_git_env called without repository > > Defer repository setup so that the help option processing happens before > the repository is initialized. > > Add tests to ensure that the

Re: [PATCH] tag: generate useful reflog message

On 02/06/2017 12:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > cornelius.w...@tngtech.com writes > For a tag, I would imagine something like "tag: tagged 4e59582ff7 > ("Seventh batch for 2.12", 2017-01-23)" would be more appropriate. Yes, I agree that this is much clearer. The revised version v3 implements

Re: feature request: add -q to "git branch"

I think I got my git versions (old and new) mixed up. Sorry for the noise. On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Pranit Bauva wrote: > Hey Kevin, > > Sorry for the previous message. > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 2:47 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote: >> Hey Kevin,

Re: BUG: "git checkout -q -b foo origin/foo" is not quiet

Yeah, my bad. I was confused. Sorry for the noise. On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Cornelius Weig wrote: > On 02/03/2017 10:36 PM, Kevin Layer wrote: >> Note that git version 1.8.3.1 is quiet and does not print the >> "tracking remote" message. > > So what you are

Re: git-scm.com status report

On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 01:41:04AM +0530, Pranit Bauva wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Jeff King wrote: > > ## What's on the site > > > > We have the domains git-scm.com and git-scm.org (the latter we've had > > for a while). They both point to the same website, which has

Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] stash: support pathspec argument

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:26:37PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > Thanks Junio for the review in the previous round. > > Changes since v2: > > - $IFS should now be supported by using "$@" everywhere instead of using > a $files variable. > - Added a new patch showing the old behaviour of git

Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] stash: introduce new format create

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:26:41PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > git stash create currently supports a positional argument for adding a > message. This is not quite in line with how git commands usually take > comments (using a -m flag). > > Add a new syntax for adding a message to git stash

Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] stash: add test for the create command line arguments

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:26:40PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > +test_expect_success 'create stores correct message' ' > + >foo && > + git add foo && > + STASH_ID=$(git stash create "create test message") && > + echo "On master: create test message" >expect && > + git show

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] stash: introduce push verb

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:26:39PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > + -m|--message) > + shift > + stash_msg=${1?"-m needs an argument"} > + ;; I think this is our first use of the "?" parameter expansion magic. It _is_ in

Cross-referencing the Git mailing list archive with their corresponding commits in `pu`

Hi Josh, as discussed at the GitMerge, I am trying to come up with tooling that will allow for substantially less tedious navigation between the local repository, the mailing list, and what ends up in the `pu` branch. That tooling would *still* not help lowering the barrier of entry for

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] Documentation/stash: remove mention of git reset --hard

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 08:26:38PM +, Thomas Gummerer wrote: > diff --git a/Documentation/git-stash.txt b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > index 2e9cef06e6..2e9e344cd7 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-stash.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-stash.txt > @@ -47,8 +47,9 @@ OPTIONS > > save

Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] stash: teach 'push' (and 'create') to honor pathspec

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 11:09:14PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > @@ -99,6 +104,10 @@ create_stash () { > > if test -z "$new_style" > > then > > stash_msg="$*" > > + while test $# != 0 > > + do > > + shift > > + done > > fi

Re: [PATCH] p5302: create repositories for index-pack results explicitly

On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 12:43:29PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote: > Before 7176a314 (index-pack: complain when --stdin is used outside of a > repo) index-pack silently created a non-existing target directory; now > the command refuses to work unless it's used against a valid repository. > That causes

[PATCH v3] tag: generate useful reflog message

From: Cornelius Weig When tags are created with `--create-reflog` or with the option `core.logAllRefUpdates` set to 'always', a reflog is created for them. So far, the description of reflog entries for tags was empty, making the reflog hard to understand. For example:

[PATCH] worktree: fix option descriptions for `prune`

The `verbose` and `expire` options of the `git worktree prune` subcommand have wrong descriptions in that they pretend to relate to objects. But as the git-worktree(1) correctly states, these options have nothing to do with objects but only with worktrees. Fix the description accordingly.

Re: A little help understanding output from git blame --reverse

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote: > I'm "difflaming" HEAD~100 (02db2d0421b97fcb6211) and HEAD > (066fb0494e6398eb). Specifically file abspath.c. I just noticed that I'm standing on a private branch. Replace HEAD for "4e59582ff" when doing your

A little help understanding output from git blame --reverse

Hi! While doing some research developing difflame I found some output from git blame --reverse that I can't quite understand. Perhaps another set of eyeballs could help me. I'm "difflaming" HEAD~100 (02db2d0421b97fcb6211) and HEAD (066fb0494e6398eb). Specifically file abspath.c. If we diff (as

Re: gitconfig get out of sync with submodule entries on branch switch

On 06.02.2017 11:35, Stefan Beller wrote: Answering the original email, as I feel we're going down the wrong rabbit hole in the existing thread. On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Benjamin Schindler wrote: Hi Consider the following usecase: I have the master branch

Re: gitconfig get out of sync with submodule entries on branch switch

Answering the original email, as I feel we're going down the wrong rabbit hole in the existing thread. On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Benjamin Schindler wrote: > Hi > > Consider the following usecase: I have the master branch where I have a > submodule A. I create a

Re: git/git-scm.com GH Issue Tracker

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Samuel Lijin wrote: > # Irrelevant but someone should take a look > > 693 To save people some time (and since i looked at it anyway), this is about whether "warning in tree xxx: contains zero-padded file modes: from fsck should be a warning or

Re: [PATCH 1/4] git-prompt.sh: add submodule indicator

On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> >> (unrelated side note:) >> At GitMerge facebook presented their improvements on mercurial >> and one of the things was "hg absorb". It would

Re: git/git-scm.com GH Issue Tracker

Adding Peff to cc as he is the current maintainer of the git-scm.com site/repo. On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Samuel Lijin wrote: > > I've taken the liberty of classifying them as shown below. > As a community member who cares a lot about that site, thank you! I would love

subtree merging fails

Hi, Please check this issue for a description of the bug: https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/issues/896#issuecomment-277587626 Regards, Stavros