Jens Lehmann jens.lehm...@web.de writes:
Am 28.01.2013 21:34, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
...
I was imagining that foreach --untracked could go something like this:
* If you are inside an existing git repository, read its index to
learn the gitlinks in the directory and its subdirectories.
Hi,
Lars Hjemli wrote:
[1] The 'git -a' rewrite patch shows how I think about this command -
it's just an option to the 'git' command, modifying the way any
subcommand is invoked (btw: I don't expect that patch to be applied
since 'git-all' was deemed to generic, so I'll just carry the patch
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
Lars Hjemli wrote:
[1] The 'git -a' rewrite patch shows how I think about this command -
it's just an option to the 'git' command, modifying the way any
subcommand is invoked (btw: I don't expect that patch to be
Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com writes:
Tracing backwards: it would be really nice to be able to do
git for-each-repo git grep -e foo -- '*.c'
This is a very good example that shows the command that is run in
the repositories found may want pathspecs passed, but at the same
time,
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:10 AM, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
...
So if I ran the world, then having commands
git -a diff
and
git for-each-repo git diff
do the same thing would be fine. Of course I don't run the world.
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
As to the pathspec limiting to affect the loop itself, not the
argument given to the command that is run, I don't think it is
absolutely needed; I am perfectly fine with declaring that
for-each-repo goes to repositories
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
Come to think of it, is there a reason why for-each-repo should
not be an extention to submodule foreach? We can view this as
visiting repositories that _could_ be registered as a submodule, in
addition to iterating over the registered submodules, no?
Am 28.01.2013 19:51, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
Come to think of it, is there a reason why for-each-repo should
not be an extention to submodule foreach? We can view this as
visiting repositories that _could_ be registered as a submodule, in
addition to
Jens Lehmann jens.lehm...@web.de writes:
Am 28.01.2013 19:51, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
Come to think of it, is there a reason why for-each-repo should
not be an extention to submodule foreach? We can view this as
visiting repositories that _could_ be
Am 28.01.2013 21:34, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Jens Lehmann jens.lehm...@web.de writes:
Am 28.01.2013 19:51, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
Come to think of it, is there a reason why for-each-repo should
not be an extention to submodule foreach? We can view
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
When working with multiple, unrelated (or loosly related) git repos,
there is often a need to locate all repos with uncommitted work and
perform some action on them (say, commit and push). Before this patch,
such tasks would require manually visiting all
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:04:08AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
One more thing that nobody brought up during the previous reviews is
if we want to support subset of repositories by allowing the
standard pathspec match mechanism. For example,
git for-each-repo -d git diff --name-only
John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk writes:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:04:08AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
One more thing that nobody brought up during the previous reviews is
if we want to support subset of repositories by allowing the
standard pathspec match mechanism. For example,
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
Lars Hjemli hje...@gmail.com writes:
The command also honours the option '--clean' which restricts the set of
repos to those which '--dirty' would skip, and '-x' which is used to
execute non-git commands.
It might make
14 matches
Mail list logo
