Re: indent-heuristic, compaction-heuristic combination

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Norbert Kiesel wrote: > Hi, > > I started using compaction-heuristic with 2.9, and then also (or so I > thought) enabled indent-heuristic with 2.11. > Only after reading a comment in "Git rev news" I realized that these 2 > options are mutually

Re: indent-heuristic, compaction-heuristic combination

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:44 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Norbert Kiesel <nkie...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I started using compaction-heuristic with 2.9, and then also (or so I >> thought) enab

[PATCH v2 4/5] describe: teach --match to accept multiple patterns

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Teach `--match` to be accepted multiple times, accumulating a list of patterns to match into a string list. Each pattern is inclusive, such that a tag need only match one of the provided patterns to be considered for matching. This extension is

[PATCH v2 5/5] describe: teach describe negative pattern matches

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Teach git-describe the `--discard` option which will allow specifying a glob pattern of tags to ignore. This can be combined with the `--match` patterns to enable more flexibility in determining which tags to consider. For example, suppose yo

[PATCH v2 3/5] name-rev: add support to discard refs by pattern match

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Extend name-rev further to support matching refs by adding `--discard` patterns. These patterns will limit the scope of refs by discarding any ref that matches at least one discard pattern. Checking the discard refs shall happen first, before ch

Re: indent-heuristic, compaction-heuristic combination

On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Norbert Kiesel wrote: > Hi, > > I started using compaction-heuristic with 2.9, and then also (or so I > thought) enabled indent-heuristic with 2.11. > Only after reading a comment in "Git rev news" I realized that these 2 > options are mutually

[PATCH] diff: prefer indent heuristic over compaction heuristic

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> The current configuration code for enabling experimental heuristics prefers the last-set heuristic in the configuration. However, it is not necessarily easy to see what order the configuration will be read. This means that it is possible for

[PATCH v2 1/5] doc: add documentation for OPT_STRING_LIST

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Commit c8ba16391655 ("parse-options: add OPT_STRING_LIST helper", 2011-06-09) added the OPT_STRING_LIST as a way to accumulate a repeated list of strings. However, this was not documented in the api-parse-options documentation. Add docu

[PATCH v2 0/5] extend describe and name-rev pattern matching

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> This series adds support for extending describe and name-rev pattern matching to allow (a) taking multiple patterns and (b) negative patterns which discard instead of keep. These changes increase the flexibility of the describe mechan

[PATCH v2 2/5] name-rev: extend --refs to accept multiple patterns

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Teach git name-rev to take a string list of patterns from --refs instead of only a single pattern. The list of patterns will be matched inclusively, such that a ref only needs to match one pattern to be included. If a ref will only be ex

Re: merge maintaining history

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:01 PM, David J. Bakeman wrote: > History > > git cloned a remote repository and made many changes pushing them all to > said repository over many months. > > The powers that be then required me to move project to new repository > server did so by

Re: [PATCH v10 19/20] branch: use ref-filter printing APIs

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Karthik Nayak <karthik@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:17 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Karthik Nayak <karthik@gmail.com> >> wrote: >

Re: [RFC for GIT] pull-request: add praise to people doing QA

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > As to the implementation, I am wondering if we can make this somehow > work well with the "trailers" code we already have, instead of > inventing yet another parser of trailers. > > In its current shape,

Re: [RFC] stash --continue

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Stephan Beyer wrote: > Hi, > > a git-newbie-ish co-worker uses git-stash sometimes. Last time he used > "git stash pop", he got into a merge conflict. After he resolved the > conflict, he did not know what to do to get the repository into the >

Re: [PATCH v3 01/38] sequencer: avoid unnecessary curly braces

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 06:57:13PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > >> On Thu, 12 Jan 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> > Johannes Schindelin writes: >> > >> > > >> > > - if (!commit->parents) { >>

Re: Different merges from translation perspective

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 8:41 PM, Alexander Shopov wrote: > Hi all, > What is the difference between simple, fast forward, automatic and > trivial merge? > I am updating the translation and the only thing I am sure about is > that these four are not octopus merges, > Fast

[PATCH RFC 2/2] diff: teach diff to expand tabs in output

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> When creating a diff for contents, we prepend a single character to represent the state of that line. This character can offset how the tabs in the real content are displayed, which may result in weird alignment issues when viewing the diffs.

[PATCH RFC 1/2] strbuf: move strbuf_add_tabexpand into strbuf.c

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> In commit 7cc13c717b52 ("pretty: expand tabs in indented logs to make things line up properly", 2016-03-16) a new function was added to insert a line into a strbuf while expanding the tabs into spaces. This functionality was used to h

Re: Microproject | Add more builtin patterns for userdiff

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:46 AM, Pickfire wrote: > While I was working buildins shell patterns for user diffs. I noticed that > the tests t4034 passes but I can reproduce it manually with: > > mkdir cpp/ && cd cpp/ && git init > > cat > pre < Foo():x(0&&1){} >

Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] diff: teach diff to expand tabs in output

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> writes: > >> I'm really not a fan of how the ws code ended up. It seems pretty ugly >> and weird to hack in the expand_tabs stuff here. However, I'm

Re: [RFC PATCH] change default for status.submoduleSummary to true

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > A user complained about the workflow with submodules: >> Re submodules pain, I've seen a lot of people get confused about >> how and when to commit submodule changes. The main thing missing >> in the related UIs is some

Re: Re: Microproject | Add more builtin patterns for userdiff

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Pickfire wrote: > > Yes, I can't reproduce it outside the test suite. I have added the builtin > and yet the test fails. test_decode_color gets same output as expect but > still it fails, should I send in the patch? You also need to ensure

Re: git diff --submodule=diff fails with submodules in a submodule

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > +cc Jacob, who implemented --submodule=diff > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:40 AM, David Parrish wrote: >> When I try to run `git diff --submodule=diff` in a submodule which has >> it's own

Re: Use base32?

On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 10:58 PM, Michael Steuer wrote: > > On 20/03/2017 16:21, Jason Hennessey wrote: >> >> On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, Johannes Schindelin wrote: Linus Torvalds writes ("Re: RFC: Another proposed hash function transition plan"): > > Of

Re: Finding a tag that introduced a submodule change

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Robert Dailey > wrote: >> I have a repository with a single submodule in it. Since the parent >> repository represents the code base for an actual product, I

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Teach name-rev to pay more attention to lightweight tags

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Here is a reroll of what I did in > > http://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqd1die00j@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com/ > > Junio C Hamano (2): > name-rev: refactor logic to see if a new candidate is a better name >

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Stefan Haller wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > >> > It might be possible to generate these lease tags prior to operations >> > which modify history and then maybe having a way to list them so you >> > can select which one you meant

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Stefan Haller <li...@haller-berlin.de> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> What if we added a separate command something like: >> >> git create-lease >> >> which you're expected to run at the

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:58 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <ava...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Stefan Haller <hal...@ableton.com> wrote: >>> Jacob K

[PATCH] ls-files: properly prepare submodule environment

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into submodules", 2016-10-07) ls-files has known how to recurse into submodules when displaying files. Unfortunately this code does not work as expected. Initially, it produced re

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Stefan Haller <hal...@ableton.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Agreed. You "take" a lease whenever you push to the remote or when you >> pull from the remote and when you pull into the branch.

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 08, 2017 at 02:54:29PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > >> > So the best way to use it is something like: >> > >> > git fetch ;# update 'master' from remote >>

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Sat, Apr 08, 2017 at 09:35:04AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > >> Is it correct that you'd essentially want something that works like: >> >> git push --force-with-lease=master:master origin master:master > > I don't

Re: [PATCH] ls-files: properly prepare submodule environment

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> wrote: > On 04/11, Jacob Keller wrote: >> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> >> >> Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into >> submodules&quo

Re: [PATCH 3/2] ls-files: only recurse on active submodules

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Never mind. git ls-files doesn't support showing files for a specific >> ancient history. (I guess

Re: Index files autocompletion too slow in big repositories (w / suggestion for improvement)

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Carlos Pita > wrote: >> This is much faster (below 0.1s): >> >> __git_index_files () >> { >> local dir="$(__gitdir)" root="${2-.}" file; >> if

Re: Simultaneous gc and repack

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:28 AM, David Turner <nova...@novalis.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 12:08 -0600, Martin Fick wrote: >> On Thursday, April 13, 2017 11:03:14 AM Jacob Keller wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:31 AM, David Turner >> >> <no

Re: [PATCH 3/2] ls-files: only recurse on active submodules

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 201

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ls-files: fix path used when recursing into submodules

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> > wrote: >> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> >> >> Don't assume that the current working

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ls-files: fix recurse-submodules with nested submodules

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> wrote: > On 04/13, Jacob Keller wrote: >> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> >> >> Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into >> submodules&quo

Re: [PATCH 3/2] ls-files: only recurse on active submodules

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: >> Add in a check to see if a submodule is active before attempting to >> recurse. This prevents 'ls-files' from trying to operate on a

Re: [PATCH] completion: optionally disable checkout DWIM

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Jeff King wrote: > When we complete branch names for "git checkout", we also > complete remote branch names that could trigger the DWIM > behavior. Depending on your workflow and project, this can > be either convenient or annoying. > > For

Re: [PATCH] status: show in-progress info for short status

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Personally, I would want this to become the default and not have a new >> option to trigger it. I think we could also extend the

Re: [PATCH] status: show in-progress info for short status

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Personally, I would want this to become the default and not have a new >> option to trigger it. I think we could also extend the

Re: [PATCH] repack: respect gc.pid lock

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 1:27 PM, David Turner wrote: > Git gc locks the repository (using a gc.pid file) so that other gcs > don't run concurrently. Make git repack respect this lock. > > Now repack, by default, will refuse to run at the same time as a gc. > This fixes a

Re: Simultaneous gc and repack

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:31 AM, David Turner wrote: > Git gc locks the repository (using a gc.pid file) so that other gcs > don't run concurrently. But git repack doesn't respect this lock, so > it's possible to have a repack running at the same time as a gc. This > makes

Re: [PATCH 7/7] Do not use curl_easy_strerror with curl < 7.12.0

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 03:04:24PM +0200, Tom G. Christensen wrote: >> ... >> These kinds of interleaved conditionals make me nervous that we'll get >> something wrong (especially

Re: Index files autocompletion too slow in big repositories (w / suggestion for improvement)

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 4:59 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Cc Gábor. > > Am 15.04.2017 um 00:33 schrieb Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason: >> >> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Carlos Pita >> wrote: >>> >>> This is much faster (below 0.1s): >>> >>> __git_index_files

Re: [PATCH] worktree add: add --lock option

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > >> As explained in the document. This option has an advantage over the >> command sequence "git worktree add && git worktree lock": there will be >> no gap that somebody

Re: [PATCH 3/2] ls-files: only recurse on active submodules

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 13, 201

Re: [RFC PATCH] parse-options: disallow double-negations of options starting with no-

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 02:08:20AM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > >> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> >> >> Many options can be negated by prefixing the option with "no-&

Re: [RFC PATCH] parse-options: disallow double-negations of options starting with no-

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:22 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:54:06PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: >> >>> This is why it's an RFC. I don't really feel

Re: [RFC PATCH] parse-options: disallow double-negations of options starting with no-

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:54:06PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > >> This is why it's an RFC. I don't really feel that it's too much of a >> problem. As for the reason why I thought it might want a f

Re: I suggest a new feature: One copy from files

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:47 PM, Rm Beer wrote: > I have a several directories with binary files datas that is discard > by .gitignore. > > I recommend make a new .gitonecopy or .gitonelog or something that > take the directories with only 1 copy of last updated and not take >

Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] Introduce timestamp_t for timestamps

On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> Changes since v3: >> >> - fixed the fix in archive-zip.c that tried to report a too large >> timestamp (and would have reported the uninitialized time_t

Re: Finding a tag that introduced a submodule change

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:40 AM, Robert Dailey wrote: > I have a repository with a single submodule in it. Since the parent > repository represents the code base for an actual product, I tag > release versions in the parent repository. I do not put tags in the > submodule

Re: git-push branch confusion caused by user mistake

On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Phil Hord writes: > >> I think git should be smarter about deducing the dest ref from the >> source ref if the source ref is in refs/remotes, but I'm not sure how >> far to take it. > > My knee-jerk

Re: diff.ignoreSubmoudles config setting broken?

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Sebastian Schuberth > <sschube...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> + Jens >> > > + Jacob Keller, who touched submodule diff display code last. >

Re: [PATCH 3/4] filter-branch: fix --prune-empty on parentless commits

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Devin J. Pohly" writes: > >> I think your point is interesting too, though. If a commit is also >> TREESAME to its parent(s?) in the _pre-filtered_ branch, it seems >> reasonable that someone might

Re: Tools that do an automatic fetch defeat "git push --force-with-lease"

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 7:15 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote: > When I'm rewriting history, "git push --force-with-lease" is a nice > safeguard compared to "git push --force", but it still assumes the > remote-tracking ref gives the old state the user wants to overwrite. > Tools

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] push: propagate push-options with --recurse-submodules

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Brandon Williams wrote: > >> Teach push --recurse-submodules to propagate push-options recursively to >> the pushes performed in the submodules. > > Some time in the future we may want "push --recurse-submodules" to do

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-worktree: use working tree for trees on the file system

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Duy Nguyen venit, vidit, dixit 25.03.2017 13:07: >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 12:55 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Michael J Gruber writes: >>> Are we at a point where we

Re: [PATCH] status: show in-progress info for short status

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Michael J Gruber writes: > >> Ordinary (long) status shows information about bisect, revert, am, >> rebase, cherry-pick in progress, and so does git-prompt.sh. status >> --short currently shows none of

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ls-files: fix path used when recursing into submodules

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 7:03 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> writes: > >> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> >> >> Don't assume that the current working directory is the root of the

Re: How to keep log history when renaming and changing simultaneously

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Urs Thuermann wrote: > Igor Djordjevic writes: > >> For both cases (renaming and splitting), would using `--find-copies` >> work for you? Perhaps with some low threshold value to start with, if >> the default

Re: [PATCH] doc: trivial typo in git-format-patch.txt

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: > Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Bilotta > --- > Documentation/git-format-patch.txt | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git

[PATCH v2 1/2] ls-files: fix recurse-submodules with nested submodules

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Since commit e77aa336f116 ("ls-files: optionally recurse into submodules", 2016-10-07) ls-files has known how to recurse into submodules when displaying files. Unfortunately this fails for certain cases, including when nesting more th

[PATCH v2 2/2] ls-files: fix path used when recursing into submodules

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Don't assume that the current working directory is the root of the repository. Correctly generate the path for the recursing child processes by building it from the work_tree() root instead. Otherwise if we run ls-files using --git-dir or --wor

Re: [PATCH] various: disallow --no-no-OPT for --no-opt options

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:50 AM, Jeff King wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 07:40:37PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> > It might even be possible to detect the existing line and >>> > have

[RFC PATCH] parse-options: disallow double-negations of options starting with no-

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Many options can be negated by prefixing the option with "no-", for example "--3way" can be prefixed with "--no-3way" to disable it. Since 0f1930c58754 ("parse-options: allow positivation of options starting

Re: I suggest a new feature: One copy from files

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Rm Beer <rmbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-04-24 3:13 GMT-03:00 Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com>: >> So, clearly you haven't defined the request very well. It *sounds* >> like what you want is the ability to say "git please

Re: [PATCH 0/5] make interpret-trailers useful for parsing

On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:42 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >>> > The above example made me wonder if we also want a format specifier >>> > to do the above without piping, but it turns out that we already >>> > have "log --format=%(trailers)",

Re: [PATCH 0/5] make interpret-trailers useful for parsing

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> Parsing trailers out of a commit message is _mostly_ easy, but there >> area a lot of funny corner cases (e.g., heuristics for how many >> non-trailers must be present before a final

Re: recursive grep doesn't respect --color=always inside submodules

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Orgad Shaneh wrote: > Hi, > > When git grep --color=always is used, and the output is redirected to > a file or a pipe, results inside submodules are not colored. Results > in the supermodule are colored correctly. > > - Orgad This occurs

Re: git gc seems to break --symbolic-full-name

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Stas Sergeev wrote: > I wanted some kind of file to use it as a > build dependency for the files that needs > to be re-built when the head changes. > This works very well besides git gc. > What other method can be used as simply > as that? git

Re: git gc seems to break --symbolic-full-name

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Stas Sergeev <s...@list.ru> wrote: > 23.07.2017 11:40, Jacob Keller пишет: >> >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Stas Sergeev <s...@list.ru> wrote: >>> >>> I wanted some kind of file to use it as a >>> build

Re: [PATCH 3/3] grep: recurse in-process using 'struct repository'

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > Convert grep to use 'struct repository' which enables recursing into > submodules to be handled in-process. > > Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams > --- > Documentation/git-grep.txt | 7 - >

Re: [PATCH v2] rebase -i: add config to abbreviate command-names

On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Personally I am happy with the beginning of each instruction line > aligned, so from that point of view, this patch is a mild Meh to me, > even though I do a fair amount of "rebase -i" myself. But obviously > I am not

Re: git gc seems to break --symbolic-full-name

On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Stas Sergeev <s...@list.ru> wrote: > 23.07.2017 11:40, Jacob Keller пишет: >> >> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Stas Sergeev <s...@list.ru> wrote: >>> >>> I wanted some kind of file to use it as a >>> build

git send-email Cc with cruft not working as expected

Hi, I recently found an issue with git-send-email where it does not properly remove the cruft of an email address when sending using a Cc: line. The specific example is with a commit containing the following Cc line, Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org # 4.10+ which is the standard way Linux upstream

Re: git send-email Cc with cruft not working as expected

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I recently found an issue with git-send-email where it does not >> properly remove the

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2017, #03; Mon, 5)

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:52 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I will try to find some time tomorrow to go over it in detail. > > Thanks, > Jake For the record, I got pulled into a project at work, so I won't have spare time to look into this for the nea

proposal for how to share other refs as part of refs/tracking/*

Hi, There's no actual code yet, (forgive me), but I've been thinking back to a while ago about attempting to find a way to share things like refs/notes, and similar refs which are usually not shared across a remote. By default, those refs are not propagated when you do a push or a pull, and this

Re: [RFC PATCH] proposal for refs/tracking/* hierarchy

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> writes: > >> Instead, lets add support for a new refs/tracking/* hierarchy which is >> laid out in such a way to avoid this inconsistency.

[RFC PATCH] proposal for refs/tracking/* hierarchy

From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> Historically, git has tracked the status of remote branches (heads) in refs/remotes//*. This is necessary and useful as it allows users to track the difference between their local work and the last known status of the remote work. Unfortu

Re: [RFC PATCH] proposal for refs/tracking/* hierarchy

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> wrote: > From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> > > Historically, git has tracked the status of remote branches (heads) in > refs/remotes//*. This is necessary and useful as it allows users &

Re: [PATCHv4 00/17] Diff machine: highlight moved lines.

On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > v4: > * interdiff to v3 (what is currently origin/sb/diff-color-move) below. > * renamed the "buffered_patch_line" to "diff_line". Originally I planned > to not carry the "line" part as it can be a piece of a line as

Re: [WIP/RFC 00/23] repository object

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > This is still very much in a WIP state, though it does pass all tests. What > I'm hoping for here is to get a discussion started about the feasibility of a > change like this and hopefully to get the ball rolling. Is

Re: [PATCH] send-email: check for repo before invoking hook

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > Jonathan Tan wrote: >> >> Thanks for the notification. Here's a patch to fix that. --- >> git-send-email.perl | 32 +--- >> t/t9001-send-email.sh | 8 2 files changed, 25

git-send-email no longer works outside a repository?

I often use git-send-email in order to send patch files. Recently when I tried to do this outside a repository I got some cryptic failures, I'm using the master branch, git version 2.13.0.311.g0339965c70d6 I generate the patch files and copy them into a separate folder outside of the repository,

Re: [PATCH 00/31] repository object

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:10 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: >> >> For those who don't like reviewing patches in email form, you can find >> this series at: >>

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2017, #03; Mon, 5)

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> * sb/diff-color-move (2017-06-01) 17 commits >> - diff.c: color moved lines differently >> - diff: buffer all output if asked to >> - diff.c: emit_line includes whitespace highlighting >> - diff.c: convert

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2017, #03; Mon, 5)

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > >>> "git diff" has been taught to optionally paint new lines that are >>> the same as deleted lines elsewhere differently from genuinely new >>> lines. >>> >>> Are we happy

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2017, #03; Mon, 5)

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote: > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:23 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> >> > [...] >> > "git diff" has been taught to optionally paint new lines that are >> > the same as deleted lines elsewhere differently

Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] config: don't implicitly use gitdir

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> What is the next step, then? You can find the notion ridiculous but >>> it's how this project has worked in my

Re: proposal for how to share other refs as part of refs/tracking/*

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Marc Branchaud wrote: > On 2017-06-13 10:41 AM, Marc Branchaud wrote: >> >> >> So I like your refs/tracking proposal, and hope that it aims for mirroring >> a remote's refs, to eventually replace refs/remotes entirely. > > > To be

Re: [RESEND PATCH] diff: recurse into nested submodules for inline diff

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > When fd47ae6a5b (diff: teach diff to display submodule difference with an > inline diff, 2016-08-31) was introduced, we did not think of recursing > into nested submodules. > > When showing the inline diff for submodules,

Re: [PATCH] describe: fix matching to actually match all patterns

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Max Kirillov wrote: > `git describe --match` with multiple patterns matches only first pattern. > If it fails, next patterns are not tried. > > Fix it, add test cases and update existing test which has wrong > expectation. > > Signed-off-by: Max

Re: [PATCH 1/1] reset: fix reset when using the sparse-checkout feature.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Kevin Willford wrote: > From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gits...@pobox.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 11:00 PM >> >> Kevin Willford writes: >> >> > 1. Does this statement, "I only care about the files in this

Re: [PATCH] describe: teach --match to handle branches and remotes

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Max Kirillov writes: > >> --match :: >> Only consider tags matching the given `glob(7)` pattern, >> - excluding the "refs/tags/" prefix. This can be used to avoid >> - leaking private

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >