Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
How about git-rev-tree? Does anybody care?
Yeah, probably not. git-rev-list does so much more than git-rev-tree ever
did.
I will keep git-rev-list; used in Jeff's git-changes-script and
some parts of
Hi,
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
I will keep git-rev-list; used in Jeff's git-changes-script and
some parts of Cogito as well.
According to my grep's, these files use git-rev-list:
git-bisect-script
git-cherry
git-format-patch-script
git-log-script
git-repack-script
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It has no point any more, all the tools check the file status on their
own, and yes, the thing should probably be removed.
How about git-rev-tree? Does anybody care?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah, probably not. git-rev-list does so much more than git-rev-tree ever
did.
Does rev-list do --edges ;-)?
BTW, I have two known bugs/problems that I haven't resolved,
which is bothering me quite a bit. Yes, it is my fault (lack of
time and
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Yeah, probably not. git-rev-list does so much more than git-rev-tree ever
did.
Does rev-list do --edges ;-)?
No, but does anybody use it? It _may_ be interesting as a git-merge-base
thing, but then we
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've lost that state. Can you explain a bit mroe..
Sorry, you have not lost anything. It is my bad that this is
the first time I brought it up. I've been seeing that from time
to time when I push to either my send to master repository
from my working
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Sorry, you have not lost anything. It is my bad that this is
the first time I brought it up. I've been seeing that from time
to time when I push to either my send to master repository
from my working repository, or from the send to master
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Are you sure you have a good git version on master? I've never seen
anything like that, and I push all the time..
Call him Zaphod: he has two heads (master and pu). You don't. As I said in
another mail, this could be very well related to Junio's
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you sure you have a good git version on master? I've never seen
anything like that, and I push all the time..
I have been esuspecting that it happens only because I rewind
and rebase pu, which you never do. The thing is, even though
I rewind pu
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 18:50, you wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Are you sure you have a good git version on master? I've never seen
anything like that, and I push all the time..
Call him Zaphod: he has two heads (master and pu). You don't. As I said in
another
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you sure you have a good git version on master? I've never seen
anything like that, and I push all the time..
I have been esuspecting that it happens only because I rewind
and rebase pu, which you
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I started out to make the -f flag to send-file work around it, but I
never finished that, partly because it really ends up being the same thing
as git-fetch-pack in reverse, which was against the whole point of
git-send-pack. Send-pack is meant to be
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 19:37, you wrote:
Linus Torvalds [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I started out to make the -f flag to send-file work around it, but I
never finished that, partly because it really ends up being the same
thing as git-fetch-pack in reverse, which was against the whole
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 19:08, you wrote:
Yes it is. To reproduce:
You do not need 2 clones.
It is enough to have one clone with a branch, and you make a commit in the
original repository.
Afterwards, pushing a new commit from the clone gives the error.
After pulling the missing commit
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Are you sure you have a good git version on master? I've never seen
anything like that, and I push all the time..
Call him Zaphod: he has two heads (master and pu). You don't.
Oh, but I most
This patch seems to fix the problem.
* If the original value of remote ref refers to an object we do
not have, and if the ref is one of the branches we are trying
to push, we refuse to update it.
* Otherwise, we do not attempt to use such an value when
computing what objects to put in
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
Yes it is. To reproduce:
Create a repository with 2 branches.
Make 2 clones of the 2 branches via SSH.
Make a commit on one clone and push.
Make another commit on the other clone and push = ERROR
This works perfectly fine, you just have to
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
But my example shows that the error happens even with 2 branches totally
unrelated to each other: if branch1 got a new commit, you can not push to
branch2 from another clone.
Sure you can.
git-send-pack remote branch2
and you've just
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 20:07, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Josef, could you give it a try please?
Perfect. Thanks.
Josef
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi,
there's git-check-files in the repository, but AFAIK nobody uses it, not
even git status, which would be the primary candidate. If really no
users of git-check-files exist, maybe we should remove it?
Ciao,
Dscho
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body
20 matches
Mail list logo
