Am 8/27/2013 23:48, schrieb Jeff King:
The counterarguments I can see are:
1. Who cares? If you want to know whether pack-objects will choke on
your huge config value, then run pack-objects.
2. Such a check would involve knowing which type we use internally to
look at
What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2013, #06; Tue, 27)
--
Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with
'-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with
'+' are in 'next'.
Git 1.8.4 was tagged and released
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:22:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
* jk/config-int-range-check (2013-08-21) 2 commits
(merged to 'next' on 2013-08-22 at 465efb3)
+ teach git-config to output large integers
+ config: properly range-check integer values
Originally merged to 'next' on
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:22:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
* jk/config-int-range-check (2013-08-21) 2 commits
(merged to 'next' on 2013-08-22 at 465efb3)
+ teach git-config to output large integers
+ config: properly range-check integer values
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
* jh/remote-hg-fetch-fix (2013-07-25) 2 commits
(merged to 'next' on 2013-07-25 at 33161ad)
+ Revert remotes-hg: bugfix for fetching non local remotes
(merged to 'next' on 2013-07-24 at 9c96641)
+ remotes-hg:
[+cc Jonathan]
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 02:05:01PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
* jk/config-int-range-check (2013-08-21) 2 commits
[...]
I think Jonathan had some concerns about the test in the first one, and
there was an open question in the second of whether we wanted to add
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2013, #06; Tue, 27)
--
Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with
'-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
I don't feel too strongly either way. I mostly kept the range checks for
--int because that is how the code already worked, and I assumed that
was what was desired. But given what I know of the history of the config
code, it is probably a completely random side
Antoine Pelisse apeli...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote:
* jh/remote-hg-fetch-fix (2013-07-25) 2 commits
(merged to 'next' on 2013-07-25 at 33161ad)
+ Revert remotes-hg: bugfix for fetching non local remotes
(merged to 'next' on
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:22:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
* kk/tests-with-no-perl (2013-08-24) 4 commits
- reset test: modernize style
- t/t7106-reset-unborn-branch.sh: Add PERL prerequisite
- add -i test: use skip_all instead of repeated PERL prerequisite
- Make test using invalid
10 matches
Mail list logo