Re: [PATCH/RFC 5/5] add tests for checking the behaviour of "unset.variable"

2014-10-02 Thread Tanay Abhra
On 10/3/2014 1:53 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Tanay Abhra writes: > >> On 10/3/2014 1:39 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Tanay Abhra writes: >>> >>>> +test_expect_success 'document how unset.variable will behave in shell >>>> scripts&

Re: [PATCH/RFC 5/5] add tests for checking the behaviour of "unset.variable"

2014-10-06 Thread Tanay Abhra
On 10/4/2014 1:42 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Matthieu Moy writes: > >> Junio C Hamano writes: Well, the normal use-case for unset.variable is to put it in a local config file, to unset a variable set in another, lower-priority file. >>> >>> I agree that is one major use case. >>>

Re: [PATCH/RFC 5/5] add tests for checking the behaviour of "unset.variable"

2014-10-06 Thread Tanay Abhra
On 10/7/2014 12:58 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > The point is to prevent"git config --add foo.baz anothervalue" starting from > > --- --- --- > [foo] > bar = some > [unset] variable = foo.baz > --- --- --- > > from adding foo.baz next to existing foo.bar. We would want to end up with > > ---

Re: [bug] [UX] `stash save --untracked` produces a stash that *looks* empty

2014-10-08 Thread Tanay Abhra
On 10/5/2014 10:58 PM, Alberto Scotto wrote: > Hi all, > > I've just found that: > - given you have an empty staging area > - and you have only untracked files in your working dir > - when you do `git stash --untracked` > - then `git stash show` gives you an empty output => stash looks empty > >

Re: [BUG?] `config branch.autosetuprebase true` breaks `rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree`

2014-10-08 Thread Tanay Abhra
On 10/8/2014 11:05 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Richard Hartmann writes: > >> So this is not a real bug report, more of a "is this intended this way?" >> richih@titanium ~/git_test % git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree >> error: Malformed value for branch.autosetuprebase >> fatal: bad config file

[PATCH] config: add show_err flag to git_config_parse_key()

2014-10-30 Thread Tanay Abhra
like `configset_find_element()` get their keys from the git itself so a return value signifying error would be enough. The error output shown to the user is useless and confusing in this case so add a show_err flag to suppress errors in such cases. Signed-off-by: Tanay Abhra --- Hi, You were

Re: [PATCH] config: add show_err flag to git_config_parse_key()

2014-10-30 Thread Tanay Abhra
>From c87ddf6397964154932d49385ed1433b62631f30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tanay Abhra Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 08:54:58 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] config: add show_err flag to git_config_parse_key() `git_config_parse_key()` is used to sanitize the input key. Some callers of the function l

Re: [PATCH] config: add show_err flag to git_config_parse_key()

2014-10-30 Thread Tanay Abhra
ly in a place where only a return value would be enough. >> >> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. >> >> Cheers, >> Tanay Abhra. > > Who are *you* in the above, and what was the bug report about (if it > was a bug report)? Perhaps summarize it in a form of

[PATCH] config: add show_err flag to git_config_parse_key()

2015-02-10 Thread Tanay Abhra
like `configset_find_element()` get their keys from the git itself so a return value signifying error would be enough. The error output shown to the user is useless and confusing in this case so add a show_err flag to suppress errors in such cases. Signed-off-by: Tanay Abhra --- Hi, I just saw

[PATCH v2] add a flag to supress errors in git_config_parse_key()

2015-02-16 Thread Tanay Abhra
King Signed-off-by: Tanay Abhra --- Hi Jeff, I went through Junio's config guideline patch series and the whole thread of underscore bug report and I also think that pager.*.command is the right path to go. If you want to relax the syntactic requirement (such as add '_' to the

[PATCH 1/1] t1308-config-set: fix a test that has a typo

2019-10-10 Thread Tanay Abhra via GitGitGadget
From: Tanay Abhra Change test 'find value_list for a key from a configset' to redirect the result to 'expect' instead of 'except' which was a typo. With this change, the test case actually fails because it uses `configset_get_value`. Clearly, this was intended to

<    1   2   3   4