Re: [PATCH v2] filter-branch: use printf instead of echo -e

Il 21/03/2018 22:50, Johannes Schindelin ha scritto: Hi Michele, On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, Michele Locati wrote: [...] -- 2.16.2.windows.1 Yay! Out of curiosity: did the CONTRIBUTING.md file help that was recently turned into a guide how to contribute to Git (for Windows) by Derrick Stolee

Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: use printf instead of echo -e

Il 20/03/2018 10:53, Ian Campbell ha scritto: On Tue, 2018-03-20 at 00:22 -0400, Jeff King wrote: Author cc'd in case there's something more interesting going on. That code was written years ago, if I had a good reason at the time I've forgotten what it was and I can't think of a fresh one

[PATCH v2] filter-branch: use printf instead of echo -e

te-branch option. Furthermore, let's switch from "/bin/echo" to just "echo", so that the built-in echo command is used where available. Signed-off-by: Michele Locati <mich...@locati.it> --- git-filter-branch.sh | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

[PATCH] filter-branch: use printf instead of echo -e

ate-branch option. Signed-off-by: Michele Locati <mich...@locati.it> --- git-filter-branch.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/git-filter-branch.sh b/git-filter-branch.sh index 1b7e4b2cd..21d84eff3 100755 --- a/git-filter-branch.sh +++ b/g

[PATCH v2] filter-branch: return 2 when nothing to rewrite

Using the --state-branch option allows us to perform incremental filtering. This may lead to having nothing to rewrite in subsequent filtering, so we need a way to recognize this case. So, let's exit with 2 instead of 1 when this "error" occurs. Signed-off-by: Michele Locati <mich

Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: return 2 when nothing to rewrite

2018-03-15 16:55 GMT+01:00 Junio C Hamano : > Jeff King writes: > >> Hrm. I took the goal to mean that we used to exit with a failing "1" in >> this case, and now we would switch to a more-specific "2". And I think >> that matches the behavior of the patch: >> >>

Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: return 2 when nothing to rewrite

2018-03-15 15:12 GMT+01:00 Jeff King <p...@peff.net>: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 02:03:59PM +0100, Michele Locati wrote: > >> Using the --state-branch option allows us to perform incremental filtering. >> This may lead to having nothing to rewrite in subsequent filtering,

[PATCH] filter-branch: return 2 when nothing to rewrite

Using the --state-branch option allows us to perform incremental filtering. This may lead to having nothing to rewrite in subsequent filtering, so we need a way to recognize this case. So, let's exit with 2 instead of 1 when this "error" occurs. Signed-off-by: Michele Locati <mich

Re: How to use filter-branch with --state-branch?

2018-03-09 14:23 GMT+01:00 Ian Campbell <i...@hellion.org.uk>: > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 14:04 +0100, Michele Locati wrote: >> Just a couple of questions: >> >> 1. it seems to me it's not possible to process all the branches in one >> go. Am I right? > > I'm

Re: How to use filter-branch with --state-branch?

2018-03-08 10:40 GMT+01:00 Ian Campbell : > > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 10:25 +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > > > The first filter-branch call required 7168 steps, so did the second > > > call... > > > I also tried without the --prune option of remote update (I had to

How to use filter-branch with --state-branch?

Recent versions of git filter-branch command introduced the --state-branch option. BTW I can't find any info about how this can be actually used. We have this repository on github: https://github.com/concrete5/concrete5 When someone pushes to that repo, we clone it and execute `git filter-branch