Re: [PATCH v8 0/5] [GSoC] remove_subtree(): reimplement using iterators

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Daniel Ferreira (theiostream) wrote: > Hey there! I'm sorry for bothering you, but any chance you might have > overlooked this patch for a review? Sort of. I read through them and found no issue back then, but did not reply anticipating someone

Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] dir_iterator: add tests for dir_iterator API

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 6:39 PM, Daniel Ferreira wrote: > +int cmd_main(int argc, const char **argv) { Style (minor nit, in case resend is needed): We only put the { brace on the same line for statements (if, for, while, switch), not for function declarations. I tried to find

Re: [PATCH v8 0/5] [GSoC] remove_subtree(): reimplement using iterators

Hey there! I'm sorry for bothering you, but any chance you might have overlooked this patch for a review? (I'm just not familiar with how long patches usually take to be reviewed, and since I always got an answer within two days of sending it I wondered if you may have just not noticed it.) --

Re: Rebase sequencer changes prevent exec commands from modifying the todo file?

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Stephen Hicks wrote: > > > Thanks for the tips. I think I have an approach that works, by simply > > returning sequencer_continue() immediately after a successful

Re: [PATCH] ls-files: properly prepare submodule environment

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: > On 04/11, Jacob Keller wrote: >> From: Jacob Keller >> >> Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into >> submodules", 2016-10-07) ls-files has known how to recurse into >>

[PATCHv2] t6500: don't run detached auto gc at the end of the test script

The last test in 't6500-gc', 'background auto gc does not run if gc.log is present and recent but does if it is old', added in a831c06a2 (gc: ignore old gc.log files, 2017-02-10), may sporadically trigger an error message from the test harness: rm: cannot remove 'trash

Re: Rebase sequencer changes prevent exec commands from modifying the todo file?

Hi Stephen, On Tue, 11 Apr 2017, Stephen Hicks wrote: > Thanks for the tips. I think I have an approach that works, by simply > returning sequencer_continue() immediately after a successful exec. I am not sure that that works really as expected, as you re-enter the sequencer_continue() and

Re: [PATCH] t6500: don't run detached auto gc at the end of the test script

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 02:27:05AM +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > >> >> I wonder if you could make it a general test-lib function, like: >> >> >> >> run_and_wait () { >> >> # we read stdout from the child only for the side

RE: Proposal for "fetch-any-blob Git protocol" and server design

Hi Jonathan, I work on the network protocols for the GVFS project at Microsoft. I shared a couple thoughts and questions below. Thanks, Kevin -Original Message- From: Stefan Beller [mailto:sbel...@google.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 7:20 PM To: Jonathan Tan

Re: [PATCH 3/4] submodule.c: harden submodule_move_head against broken submodules

From: "Stefan Beller" Early on in submodule_move_head just after the check if the submodule is initialized, we need to check if the submodule is populated correctly. If the submodule is initialized but doesn't look like populated, this s/like// or s/like/like it is/

Re: [PATCH 1/4] entry.c: submodule recursing: respect force flag correctly

From: "Stefan Beller" In case of a non-forced worktree update, the submodule movement is tested in a dry run first, such that it doesn't matter if the actual update is done via the force flag. However for correctness, we want to give the flag is specified by the user. All

[PATCH] refs.h: rename submodule arguments to submodule_path

In submodule land we carefully need to distinguish between the path of a submodule and its name. The path of a submodule is the path that is recorded in the working tree of the superproject and describes where the submodule is bound to the superprojects tree. The name as introduced in 941987a554

[no subject]

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:14 PM, taylor, david wrote: > We are using Git in a distributed environment. > > In the United States, we have the master repository in one state and a build cluster in a different state. > In addition to people in the US

Re: [PATCH 1/5] run-command: convert sane_execvp to sane_execvpe

On 04/10, Brandon Williams wrote: > Convert 'sane_execvp()' to 'sane_execvpe()' which optionally takes a > pointer to an array of 'char *' which should be used as the environment > for the process being exec'd. If no environment is provided (by passing > NULL instead) then the already existing

git subtree bug

Hi guys, I've been using git subtrees extensively to include third party tools in my projects. Today I stumbled across a bug with git-subtree when I was trying to update the jacoco (https://github.com/jacoco/jacoco.git) subtree in one of my projects. The problem stems from adding a project as a

Re: [PATCH] fetch-pack: show clearer error message upon ERR

On 04/11/2017 02:47 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: nit about the error message: since this isn't a sign of an internal error, we don't need to tell the user that it happened in git fetch-pack. How about using the same error used e.g. in run_remote_archiver and get_remote_heads?

[PATCH v2] fetch-pack: show clearer error message upon ERR

Currently, fetch-pack prints a confusing error message ("expected ACK/NAK") when the server it's communicating with sends a pkt-line starting with "ERR". Replace it with a less confusing error message. Also update the documentation describing the fetch-pack/upload-pack protocol

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] convert: add "status=delayed" to filter process protocol

I think this is a great approach and one that I'd be happy to implement in LFS. The additional capability isn't too complex, so I think other similar filters to LFS shouldn't have a hard time implementing it either. I left a few comments, mostly expressing approval to the documentation changes.

Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] convert: add "status=delayed" to filter process protocol

> > (And at this point, may I suggest to change "delay-id" into "request-id=1" ? > > If there is no objection by another reviewer then I am happy to change it. I think "delay-id" may be more illustrative of what's occurring in this request. That being said, my preference would be that we remove

Re: [PATCH] ls-files: properly prepare submodule environment

On 04/11, Jacob Keller wrote: > From: Jacob Keller > > Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into > submodules", 2016-10-07) ls-files has known how to recurse into > submodules when displaying files. > > Unfortunately this code does not work as

RE: [PATCH 3/3] reset.c: update files when using sparse to avoid data loss.

> -Original Message- > From: git-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:git-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On > Behalf Of Duy Nguyen > Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:21 AM > To: Kevin Willford > Cc: Kevin Willford ; git@vger.kernel.org; > gits...@pobox.com;

[PATCH] worktree: change 'worktree' to 'working tree' in help text

We have been trying to keep the terminology consistent on the user-facing front. Let's keep sticking to "working tree". While at there, change 'other' to 'another'. The latter is probably more correct. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy --- builtin/worktree.c | 2 +- 1 file

[PATCH] worktree add: add --lock option

As explained in the document. This option has an advantage over the command sequence "git worktree add && git worktree lock": there will be no gap that somebody can accidentally "prune" the new worktree (or soon, explicitly "worktree remove" it). "worktree add" does keep a lock on while it's

Re: git work trees

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:14 PM, taylor, david wrote: > We are using Git in a distributed environment. > > In the United States, we have the master repository in one state and a build > cluster in a different state. > In addition to people in the US doing builds, we have

Re: `git status` output is very misleading after a merge on a "detached HEAD"

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason venit, vidit, dixit 12.04.2017 14:18: >> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: >>> Am 11. April 2017 22:40:14 MESZ schrieb "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" >>>

Re: [PATCH 3/3] reset.c: update files when using sparse to avoid data loss.

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 5:30 AM, Kevin Willford wrote: > The loss of the skip-worktree bits is part of the problem if you are talking > about modified files. The other issue that I was having is when running a > reset > and there were files added in the commit that is

Re: `git status` output is very misleading after a merge on a "detached HEAD"

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason venit, vidit, dixit 12.04.2017 14:18: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: >> Am 11. April 2017 22:40:14 MESZ schrieb "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" >> : >>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Enis Bayramoğlu HEAD

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Jeff King wrote: > I dunno. Maybe I am missing some subtle case, but it's not clear to me > what the user would be trying to do by having git stay in the original > directory. Not sure if it really happens. But if we jump from worktree is inside

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 06:13:49PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > Can't we model this after how setup_git_directory_gently() gives the > > subcommands a choice? While the majority of subcommands do not call > > the _gently() variant and die when we are not in a repository, the > > rest do use it

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 01:30:31PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Jeff King wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 07:01:00PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> An alternative is, when you have found out you need to read .mailmap, > >> you call

Re: [PATCH v6] http.postbuffer: allow full range of ssize_t values

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 07:39:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > >> The only unresolved issue was whether we can count on curl being new > >> enough for CURLOPT_POSTFIELDSIZE_LARGE to be present. I say > >> "unresolved" but it is resolved in my mind since

Re: `git status` output is very misleading after a merge on a "detached HEAD"

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Am 11. April 2017 22:40:14 MESZ schrieb "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" > : >>On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Enis Bayramoğlu >>> HEAD detached from origin/master 1 commit ago, >> >>In lieu of that, which

[PATCH v2 1/1] Document how to normalize the line endings

From: Torsten Bögershausen The instructions how to normalize the line endings should have been updated as part of commit 6523728499e 'convert: unify the "auto" handling of CRLF', (but that part never made it into the commit). Update the documentation in

Re: `git status` output is very misleading after a merge on a "detached HEAD"

Enis Bayramoğlu venit, vidit, dixit 12.04.2017 08:15: > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: >> Am 11. April 2017 22:40:14 MESZ schrieb "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" >> : >>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Enis Bayramoğlu >>>

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:41 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Duy Nguyen writes: > >>> I think this is much more than just .mailmap, though. For instance, I >>> have noticed a similar problem with .gitattributes: >> >> Urgh. assuming that we should not read

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

Junio C Hamano wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Jacob Keller wrote: > > > > If you're already copying sha1s around you could use those as the > > --force-with-lease=branch:, no? > > > > That's better guarantee than just using

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 02:37:27PM +0200, Stefan Haller wrote: > > > Are you talking about the case where the user doesn't say git pull, but > > instead says "git fetch && git merge --ff @{u}"? Just so that I > > understand the concern. > > Yes, that (which is

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

Stefan Haller wrote: > Then, every command that either integrates the remote tracking branch > into the local branch, or updates the remote tracking branch to the > local branch, will update the value of the "lease" entry. The most > obvious ones are "git pull" and "git

Re: [PATCH v2] pathspec: honor `PATHSPEC_PREFIX_ORIGIN` with empty prefix

Patrick Steinhardt writes: > Just a short reminder on this patch, as I haven't seen it or > v1 being picked up by the What's Cooking reports. Am I simply > being too eager or was this an oversight? I have been offline and will be for a few more days; I may occasionally pop in to

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

Duy Nguyen writes: >> I think this is much more than just .mailmap, though. For instance, I >> have noticed a similar problem with .gitattributes: > > Urgh. assuming that we should not read .gitattributes if there's no > worktree to read from (similar to the "defaults to .git"

Re: [PATCH v2] pathspec: honor `PATHSPEC_PREFIX_ORIGIN` with empty prefix

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 11:16:56AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > Previous to commit 5d8f084a5 (pathspec: simpler logic to prefix original > pathspec elements, 2017-01-04), we were always using the computed > `match` variable to perform pathspec matching whenever > `PATHSPEC_PREFIX_ORIGIN` is

Re: [PATCH] Make git log work for git CWD outside of work tree

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 07:01:00PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: >> An alternative is, when you have found out you need to read .mailmap, >> you call setup_work_tree() then, which prepares the worktree for you >> (including moving

Re: `git status` output is very misleading after a merge on a "detached HEAD"

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Am 11. April 2017 22:40:14 MESZ schrieb "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" > : >>On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Enis Bayramoğlu >> wrote: Well, what do you suggest as an