Re: js/mingw-http-ssl, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2018, #05; Fri, 26)

Hi Junio, On 30 October 2018 11:07:39 GMT+05:30, Junio C Hamano wrote: >Eric Sunshine writes: >>> On platforms with recent cURL library, http.sslBackend >configuration >>> variable can be used to choose different SSL backend at runtime. >> >> s/choose/& a/ >> >>> The Windows port

Re: git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

On 3 October 2018 00:13:06 GMT+05:30, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: >Hi, > >Sorry for the delay. Got a little busy over the weekend. I seem to have >found the reason behind the issue in the mean time :-) > Oops, I forgot to mention there's more comments inline! BTW, is there an iss

Re: git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 6:46 AM Kaartic Sivaraam > > > wrote: > > > > This is the most interesting part of the issue. I **did not** run > > > > 'git fetch ...' in between those cat commands. I was surprised by > > > > how the contents of FET

Re: git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

Hi, I just wanted make a point a little more clear. See comment inline. On 24 September 2018 01:39:26 GMT+05:30, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > To add to that >confusion when I run > > $ cat $MAIN_WORKTREE/.git/worktrees/$BUILD_WORKTREE/FETCH_HEAD > >it seems to be print

Re: git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

On 26 September 2018 03:10:17 GMT+05:30, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > That looks like fetching only the 'next' branch and nothing else to > me. > Interesting. > Perhaps your script is referring to a variable whose assignment is > misspelled and invoking > > git fetch $origin $branch >

Re: git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 17:17 +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:19 PM Kaartic Sivaraam > wrote: > > Yes, some bugs. It behaves correctly for me. There must be something > strange that triggers this. What's your "git worktree list" (iow > anyth

git fetch behaves weirdely when run in a worktree

Hi, I was actually trying to automae the building and installation of Git source code to reduce my burden. I tried to automate it with the help of a script that runs daily via cron and a separate worktree used only by the build script.y run The script typically fetches new changes for the next

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.19.0-rc0

On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 06:26 -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > > Around the time that my proposed approaches were getting vetoed for > alignment issues, I figured I was out of my depth here. I reached out to > Daniel Lemire (of EWAH bitmap fame) on Twitter [1]. His blog is full of > posts of

Re: [PATCH] Makefile: enable DEVELOPER by default

On Mon, 2018-08-06 at 13:02 -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote: > > Any idea when this is going to be in an official release, and exactly > what the settings will be for "Not Developer". I assume DEVELOPER=0 > and DEVOPTS=error, which is the current behaviour, correct? I am the > platform maintainer

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Aug 2018, #06; Wed, 29)

On 30 August 2018 21:41:35 GMT+05:30, Elijah Newren wrote: >That makes sense. I'm not sure I can concisely convey all the right >points, but here's a stab at rewording: > >Recent addition of "directory rename" heuristics to the >merge-recursive backend makes the command susceptible to false

Doc/SubmittingPatches: re-phrashing a sentence about alternate solutions (was Re: [PATCH] Makefile: make NO_ICONV really mean "no iconv")

On Sun, 2018-06-17 at 14:00 -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > Whether or not to talk about alternate solutions in the commit message > is a judgment call. Same for deciding what belongs in the commit > message proper and what belongs in the "commentary" section of a > patch. A patch author should

Re: [PATCH] Makefile: make NO_ICONV really mean "no iconv"

On Friday 15 June 2018 01:13 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:58 AM Simon Ruderich wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 10:25:03PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: >>> This patch is extra noisy due to the indentation change. Viewing it with >>> "git diff -w" helps. An alternative to

Re: [PATCH] submodule: fix NULL correctness in renamed broken submodules

On Thursday 14 June 2018 11:01 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: > While at it, make sure we only attempt to load the submodule if a git > directory of the submodule is found as default_name_or_path will return > NULL in case the git directory cannot be found. I found this a little hard to read. Maybe it

[PATCH v2] t3200: clarify description of --set-upstream test

long as we intentionally fail on seeing the '--set-upstream' option which in turn we expect to do for a period of time after which we can be sure that existing users of '--set-upstream' are aware that the option is no longer supported. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam --- Changes since v1:

Re: [PATCH] t3200: clarify description of --set-upstream test

On Thursday 14 June 2018 11:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > It is technically correct to call --set-upstream "unsupported", but > the reason why we want to see it fail is not because it is > unsupported, but because we actively interfere with the usual > "unique prefix" logic parse-options API

[PATCH] t3200: clarify description of --set-upstream test

which uses the '--set-upstream' option fails and doesn't silently act as an alias for the '--set-upstream-to' option due to option parsing features. To avoid confusion, clarify that the option is an unsupported one in the corresponding test description. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam --- t/t3200

Re: BUG: submodule code prints '(null)'

On Tuesday 05 June 2018 09:01 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > I'll leave it to submodule people to fix this :) > I'm Ccing the only one I know to gain attention. -- Sivaraam QUOTE: “The three principal virtues of a programmer are Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris.” - Camel book Sivaraam?

Re: [PATCH] t3200-branch.sh: use "--set-upstream-to" in test

On Tuesday 05 June 2018 04:54 PM, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > Though arguably the test name could be more descriptive and tell why > it should fail. > That's arguable, indeed. I was about to send a patch that gives a better description for the test. I didn't do it as I started wondering, Is it even

Re: [PATCH] branch: issue "-l" deprecation warning after pager starts

On Friday 25 May 2018 08:10 AM, Jeff King wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] branch: customize "-l" warning in list mode > > People mistakenly use "git branch -l", thinking that it > triggers list mode. It doesn't, but the lack of non-option > arguments in that command does (and the "-l" becomes a >

Re: [PATCH] branch: issue "-l" deprecation warning after pager starts

On Friday 25 May 2018 01:01 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 03:22:14PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > Hmm, actually, I suppose the true value of the warning is to help people > doing "git branch -l foo", and it would still work there. The "more > extreme" from your suggested patch

jk/branch-l-0-deprecation (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2018, #02; Thu, 17))

On Thursday 17 May 2018 07:06 PM, Jeff King wrote: > But because git-branch does not kick in the pager until later > (because it only wants to do it for list-mode), that happens _after_ > we've emitted the message. > I observe exactly the consequence of this behaviour. First, the error is

Re: [GSoC] A blog about 'git stash' project

On 21 May 2018 01:03:22 GMT+05:30, Paul-Sebastian Ungureanu wrote: > > I actually wrote a >short paragraph about one of them (the one regarding -p option) on the >blog (the first post). > That's interesting. I didn't realise that you wrote about one of the

Re: jk/branch-l-0-deprecation (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2018, #02; Thu, 17))

Hi Ævar, On Thursday 17 May 2018 03:18 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > I've ended up with that $LESS setting via hackery over the years, so > maybe I'm doing something retarded, minimal test case: > > PAGER=less LESS="--no-init --quit-if-one-screen" git branch -l > > ... > > So I

Re: [GSoC] A blog about 'git stash' project

On Thursday 17 May 2018 02:39 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > I have great empathy for the desire to see these bugs fixed. The > conversion must come first, though, and in the interest of making it > easier on me and other reviewers, I must insist on keeping the conversion > free of any changes,

Re: [GSoC] A blog about 'git stash' project

On Thursday 17 May 2018 12:28 PM, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > Hi Sebi, > > I thought of pointing you to one of the issues with the current > implementation of 'git stash' which you could probably fix while porting > it to C. > > ... > Forgot to mention about another

Re: [GSoC] A blog about 'git stash' project

Hi Sebi, I thought of pointing you to one of the issues with the current implementation of 'git stash' which you could probably fix while porting it to C. It's about stashing untracked files. You could find more information about it in the following mailing list thread:

jk/branch-l-0-deprecation (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2018, #02; Thu, 17))

On Thursday 17 May 2018 11:31 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * jk/branch-l-0-deprecation (2018-03-26) 3 commits > > ... > > The "-l" option in "git branch -l" is an unfortunate short-hand for > "--create-reflog", but many users, both old and new, somehow expect > it to be something else, perhaps

Re: [PATCH v2] mailmap: update brian m. carlson's email address

On Wednesday 09 May 2018 05:49 AM, brian m. carlson wrote: > Correct, it doesn't. In my case, I was using --pretty='%aN <%aE>', > which is how I noticed it in the first place. So, how about updating the commit message to avoid confusions to the incidental future reader? (Or is it just not worth

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/3] Teach remote add the --remote-tags option

On Tuesday 01 May 2018 10:29 PM, Wink Saville wrote: > When --remote-tags is passed to `git remote add` the tagopt is set to > --remote-tags and a second fetch line is added so tags are placed in > a separate hierarchy per remote. > I find '--remote' in the option name to be redundant given that

Re: [PATCH 3/8] push tests: add more testing for forced tag pushing

On Monday 30 April 2018 01:50 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > diff --git a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > index 15c8d5a734..c9a2011915 100755 > --- a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > +++ b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > @@ -981,7 +981,17 @@ test_expect_success 'push requires --force to

Re: [PATCH 3/8] push tests: add more testing for forced tag pushing

On Tuesday 08 May 2018 08:49 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> I couldn't quite get what you meant by "(but not the other way >> around)". Did you mean >> >> $ git push --force ../child2 refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* >> >> should not become non-forcing

Re: Weak option parsing in `git submodule`

On Tuesday 08 May 2018 12:35 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> The lack of checking for the reason behind why `git add` fails seems to >> be the reason behind that weird message. > > (from the man page) > git submodule [--quiet] add [] [--] [] > > When options are given after or we can

Re: main url for linking to git source?

On Monday 07 May 2018 11:45 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> I could see arguments both ways, so I thought I'd take a straw poll of >> what people on the list think. > > Junios reply below focuses on the URL passed to git-clone, which > is only found at https://git-scm.com/downloads (?) > > There I

Re: [PATCH v2] mailmap: update brian m. carlson's email address

On Tuesday 08 May 2018 07:28 AM, brian m. carlson wrote: > An earlier change, cdb6b5ac (".mailmap: Combine more (name, email) to > individual persons", 2013-08-12), noted that there were two name > spellings and two email addresses and mapped the crustytoothpaste.net > address to the

Re: [PATCH 3/8] push tests: add more testing for forced tag pushing

Hi, On Monday 30 April 2018 01:50 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > diff --git a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > index 15c8d5a734..c9a2011915 100755 > --- a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > +++ b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh > @@ -981,7 +981,17 @@ test_expect_success 'push requires --force to

Weak option parsing in `git submodule`

I recently faced the consequence of the weak option parsing done by in `git submodule`. Initially tried to add a new submodule using the `git submodule add` sub-command in the following way, $ git submodule add ./foo/bar This cloned the submodule into a new directory named 'bar' in the

Re: [GSoC] A blog about 'git stash' project

Hi Sebi, On Friday 04 May 2018 03:18 AM, Paul-Sebastian Ungureanu wrote: > Hello everybody, > > The community bonding period started. It is well known that for a > greater rate of success, it is recommended to send weekly reports > regarding project status. But, what would be a good form for

Re: [PATCH] git: add -N as a short option for --no-pager

On Wednesday 25 April 2018 11:55 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > I considered -P, but thought that it would better be reserved for > something related to "paths". We have --{html,man,info}-path, which > would be served better with -[HMI]. That leaves --exec-path, which we > would probably abbreviate

Re: [PATCH] git: add -N as a short option for --no-pager

On Thursday 26 April 2018 01:01 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > Right. But I have LESS=RS because I do *not* want it to remain on screen > by default. > In that case how about updating the commit message to be more clear about it. How about, It is possible to configure 'less', the pager,

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 38

Hi, On Tuesday 17 April 2018 03:56 AM, Christian Couder wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> That said, I read the draft and found it good except for two minor issues, > > Thanks f

Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 38

Hi, On Monday 16 April 2018 08:33 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: > Christian Couder writes: >> Here "the above article" means the Jake's "branch -l: print useful >> info whilst rebasing a non-local branch" article above the current >> article. Just a little correction. I

[PATCH v3 2/2] t3200: verify "branch --list" sanity when rebasing from detached HEAD

ous commit fixed this problem, so add a test to verify that the output is sane in this situation. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- t/t3200-branch.sh | 24 1 file changed, 24 i

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] t3200: verify "branch --list" sanity when rebasing from detached HEAD

On Tuesday 03 April 2018 01:30 PM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >> Note that the "detached HEAD" test case might actually fail in some cases >> as the actual output of "git branch --list" might contain remote branch >> names which is not considered by the test case as it is rare to happen >> in the test

[PATCH v2 0/2] branch --list: print useful info whilst interactive rebasing a detached HEAD

e if (state.bisect_in_progress) strbuf_addf(, _("(no branch, bisect started on %s)"), state.branch); else if (state.detached_from) { Eric Sunshine (1): t3200: verify "branch --list" sanity when rebasing from detached HEAD K

[PATCH v2 1/2] branch --list: print useful info whilst interactive rebasing a detached HEAD

while also inducing undefined behaviour. So, print the point from which the rebase was started when interactive rebasing a detached HEAD. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- ref-filter.c | 12 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git

[PATCH v2 2/2] t3200: verify "branch --list" sanity when rebasing from detached HEAD

he test case as it is rare to happen in the test environment. Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- t/t3200-branch.sh | 24 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) diff --git a/t/t32

Re: [PATCH] branch -l: print useful info whilst rebasing a non-local branch

On Sunday 25 March 2018 11:18 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 09:11:34AM +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: >> On Sunday 25 March 2018 07:04 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: >>> Can we have a couple new tests: one checking "git branch --list" for >>>

Re: [PATCH] branch -l: print useful info whilst rebasing a non-local branch

On Sunday 25 March 2018 10:03 AM, Jeff King wrote: > ... > but I'd prefer to avoid those kinds of magic rules if we can. They're > very hard to explain to the user, and can be quite baffling when they go > wrong. > I fell the same too. > IMHO we should do one of: > > 1. Nothing. ;) > > 2.

Re: [PATCH] branch -l: print useful info whilst rebasing a non-local branch

On Sunday 25 March 2018 07:04 AM, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> When rebasing interacitvely (rebase -i), "git branch -l" prints a line > > The "git branch -l" thre

[PATCH] branch -l: print useful info whilst rebasing a non-local branch

ucing undefined behaviour. So, print the commit from which the rebase started when interactive rebasing a non-local branch. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- ref-filter.c | 10 +- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/ref-fil

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] builtin/branch: give more useful error messages when renaming

On Friday 16 March 2018 02:03 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Quite honestly, I am not sure if this amount of new code that > results in sentence lego is really worth it. Speaking specifically about the new code for the sentence lego: I currently lack knowledge of a better way to achieve the same

Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] branch: introduce dont_fail parameter for branchname validation

On Friday 16 March 2018 01:57 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> writes: > > So... I am not finding dont_fail that was mentioned on the title > anywhere else in the patch. Such lack of attention to detail is > a bit off-putting. >

Re: Bug, git rebase -i does not abort correctly

On Friday 26 January 2018 02:54 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > Sort of. It smells bad design to me when a mistake can easily become a > feature. But with your help, I think I should be able to disable this > feature on my local build. Thanks. > In case you're still facing this issue, it just struck

[PATCH v4 0/3] give more useful error messages while renaming branch (reboot)

nks to the strbuf API that made it possible to easily construct the composite error message strings! Kaartic Sivaraam (3): branch: introduce dont_fail parameter for branchname validation builtin/branch: give more useful error messages when renaming t/t3200: fix a typo in a test description branc

[PATCH v4 1/3] branch: introduce dont_fail parameter for branchname validation

-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- branch.c | 59 branch.h | 61 +- builtin/branch.c | 4 +-- builtin/checkout.c | 5 ++-- 4 files changed, 88 insertions(

[PATCH v4 2/3] builtin/branch: give more useful error messages when renaming

'tset' doesn't exist; branch 'master' already exists Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- builtin/branch.c | 111 +++ 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin/branch.c b/builtin/branch.c

[PATCH v4 3/3] t/t3200: fix a typo in a test description

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- t/t3200-branch.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/t/t3200-branch.sh b/t/t3200-branch.sh index 503a88d02..6c0b7ea4a 100755 --- a/t/t3200-branch.sh +++ b/t/t3200-branch.sh @@ -528,7

Re: [PATCH] t/known-leaky: add list of known-leaky test scripts

On Wednesday 21 February 2018 02:14 AM, Martin Ågren wrote: > To sum up: I probably won't be looking into Travis-ing such a blacklist > in the near future. > Just thinking out loud, how about having a white-list instead of a black-list and using it to run only those tests in the white list.

Re: [PATCH v2] Fix misconversion of gitsubmodule.txt

Hi, On Wednesday 21 February 2018 12:20 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > Kaartic was the last to touch that file, > (as found via git log origin/master -- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt), > sorry I did not find this in the review. > "Non-ASCII characters" made me dig into to this a little deeper as

Re: Bug/comment

On Tuesday 30 January 2018 05:32 AM, Andrew Ardill wrote: > Hi Ilija, > > On 30 January 2018 at 10:21, Ilija Pecelj wrote: >> Though it might not be considered a bug 'per se' it is definitely wired. >> Namely, when you type 'yes' word and hit enter in git bash for widnows, the

Re: Bug, git rebase -i does not abort correctly

Hi, On Thursday 25 January 2018 05:43 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > rebase scripts are too much for me, so I'll play the user reporting > bugs this time :) >  > Instead of doing >  > $ git rebase -i --onto origin/master @~3 >  > I sometimes accidentally type >  > $ git rebase -i origin/master

Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Doc/submodules: a few updates

On Wednesday 17 January 2018 01:32 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I had a few "Huh?" > moments while reading the resulting text, but nothing show-stopping. > It always happens when there are people around who are trying to be over careful :) Anyways, it's only now that I remember that I've missed

[PATCH v3 2/2] Doc/git-submodule: improve readability and grammar of a sentence

While at it, correctly quote important words. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 16 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodu

[PATCH v3 1/2] Doc/gitsubmodules: make some changes to improve readability and syntax

submodule is considered active Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> Helped-by: Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 100 +++- 1 file changed, 79

[PATCH v3 0/2] Doc/submodules: a few updates

ield is present. +starting with 'b' except 'baz' are also active, regardless of the +presence of the .url field. Workflow for a third party library -- Kaartic Sivaraam (2): Doc/gitsubmodules: make some changes to improve readability and syntax Doc/git-submodule: improve readability and grammar of a sen

[PATCH v2 0/2] Doc/submodules: a few updates

except baz (foo, bar, bob) are active.+} {+'foo' due to its own active flag and all the others due to the+} {+submodule active pathspec, which specifies that any submodule+} {+starting with 'b' except 'baz' are also active, no matter if+} {+the .url field is present.+} Workflow for a third party lib

[PATCH v2 2/2] Doc/git-submodule: improve readability and grammar of a sentence

While at it, correctly quote important words. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt

[PATCH v2 1/2] Doc/gitsubmodules: make some changes to improve readability and syntax

submodule is considered active Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> Helped-by: Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 93 +++-- 1 file changed, 72

Re: [PATCH 6/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: improve readability of certain lines

On Wednesday 10 January 2018 01:01 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: The submodule's `$GIT_DIR/config` file would come into play when running `git push --recurse-submodules=check` in the superproject, as this would @@ -107,13 +108,13 @@ If the submodule is not yet initialized, then the

Re: [PATCH 4/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: avoid abbreviations

On Wednesday 10 January 2018 12:56 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:15 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >>>> >>>> - * The command line for th

Re: [PATCH 3/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: specify how submodules help in reduced size

On Wednesday 10 January 2018 12:31 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:08 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmod

Re: [PATCH 0/8] Doc/submodules: a few updates

On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:38 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > While small patches are really appreciated for code (bisect, automated > testing, and > the general difficulty to reas

Re: [PATCH 6/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: improve readability of certain lines

On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:19 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Kaartic Sivaraam > <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> - * The command line for those commands that support taking submodule >> - specifications. Most commands

Re: [PATCH 4/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: avoid abbreviations

On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:15 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> >> - * The command line for those commands that support taking submodule specs. > > ++ The command line for those commands that support taking submodules > as part of their pathspecs[1]. > ++ > ++[1] pathspec is an official term

Re: [PATCH 3/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: specify how submodules help in reduced size

On Tuesday 09 January 2018 12:08 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt >> b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt >> index cb795c6b6..3f73983d5 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt >> @@ -63,6 +63,9 @@ Submodules can

Re: [PATCH 2/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: clearly specify advantage of submodule

>>content that is not compressed by delta computation between trees. >> - However you can also use submodules to e.g. hold large binary assets >> + Therefore you can use submodules to hold large binary assets > > If this improves readability by a lot, I'd be all for it. But this

[BUG] "git stash -p" doesn't work well when splitting nearby changes

I recently made two changes to nearby lines (approx. 3 lines b/w them) in a file and wanted to stash one part of it and not the other. I tried to use "git stash -p" for this. I split the hunk of concern (of course, they came out as a single hunk) and gave 'y' for one and 'n' for the other. The

[PATCH 8/8] Doc/git-submodule: correctly quote important words

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 8 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt index befbccde6..5c4d941cc 100644 --- a/Documentati

[PATCH 6/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: improve readability of certain lines

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 19 ++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index 745a3838e..339fb73db

[PATCH 7/8] Doc/git-submodule: improve readability and grammar of a sentence

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/git-submodule.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt index ff612001d..befbccde6 100644 --- a/Documentati

[PATCH 4/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: avoid abbreviations

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index 3f73983d5..e3c798d2a 100644 --- a/Documen

[PATCH 5/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: use "Git directory" consistently

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index e3c798d2a..745a3838e 100644 --- a/Documen

[PATCH 3/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: specify how submodules help in reduced size

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index cb795c6b6..3f73983d5 100644 --- a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt

[PATCH 2/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: clearly specify advantage of submodule

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index bf46b0fb5..cb795c6b6 100644 --- a/Documen

[PATCH 1/8] Doc/gitsubmodules: split a sentence for better readability

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt b/Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt index 46cf120f6..bf46b0fb5 100644 --- a/Documen

[PATCH 0/8] Doc/submodules: a few updates

king the user wonder, "How at all does 'git submodule update --force' differs from 'git submodule update'?" also "using git checkout --force if appropriate" seems to be invoking all sorts confusion as "appropriate" is superfluous. How could these confusions be clar

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2017, #05; Wed, 27)

On Wednesday 03 January 2018 02:56 PM, Daniel Knittl-Frank wrote: On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: * dk/describe-all-output-fix (2017-12-27) 1 commit - describe: prepend "tags/" when describing tags with embedded name An old regression in "git

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.16.0-rc0

On Friday 29 December 2017 10:00 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: * "git branch" and "git checkout -b" are now forbidden from creating a branch whose name is "HEAD". "git branch" already forbid a branch named "HEAD", didn't it? I thought we just made "git checkout -b" to reject "HEAD" as a

Re: Error in `git': free(): invalid pointer (was Re: [PATCH] sequencer: improve config handling)

On Friday 22 December 2017 05:19 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: Hi Kaartic, I think I didn't mention I've set `commit.gpgsign` to `true` for that repo, did I? Hah! I had troubles to associate the correct line in my versions of Git's source code (the line numbers alone are only reliable if

Re: Error in `git': free(): invalid pointer (was Re: [PATCH] sequencer: improve config handling)

On Thu, 2017-12-21 at 16:53 +, phillip.w...@talktalk.net wrote: > Hm, There is a problem with sequencer_remove_state() which does > > free(opts->gpg_sign) > > however unless a gpg key was given on the commandline, opts->gpg is > initialized to "" which is statically allocated. > > This

Re: Error in `git': free(): invalid pointer (was Re: [PATCH] sequencer: improve config handling)

On Thu, 2017-12-21 at 15:06 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Kaartic, > I fear that the strace does not cover the `git-rebase` process nor the > `git-rebase--helper` process (which must have been part of your run, as > the commit affected only that part of the rebase operation). > Yep. It

Re: Error in `git': free(): invalid pointer (was Re: [PATCH] sequencer: improve config handling)

On Thursday 21 December 2017 02:09 AM, phillip.w...@talktalk.net wrote: > > > Hi Kaartic > > I'm replying off list as I've only got access to webmail at the > moment. No issues brought the CCs including the list to ensure we don't miss things. > Are you able to do a backtrace

Error in `git': free(): invalid pointer (was Re: [PATCH] sequencer: improve config handling)

I recently encountered that error when trying to do an interactive rebase after using filter-branch to remove a file completely in a repository. I bisected this issue which pointed at this patch. I'm not sure how it is related as I'm not too familiar with the sequencer code. I could help in case

Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2017, #04; Tue, 19)

On Wednesday 20 December 2017 03:30 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: * pw/sequencer-in-process-commit (2017-12-13) 10 commits (merged to 'next' on 2017-12-13 at ec4d2b9c84) ... The sequencer infrastructure is shared across "git cherry-pick", "git rebase -i", etc., and has always spawned "git

[PATCH v3] imap-send: URI encode server folder

URI-encoded. So, URI-encode the folder before adding it to the URI to ensure it doesn't contain characters that aren't allowed in a URI. Reported-by: Doron Behar <doron.be...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin <nmoreychaisemar...@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Kaa

Re: 'git format-patch --summary' seems to be turning off the stat

On Tuesday 19 December 2017 12:07 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> writes: Note: I do see that "--summary" is a diff-option but does that mean we should't be printing stat information in the patch when the user didn't mention "-

[PATCH v2] imap-send: URI encode server folder

From: Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin When trying to send a patch using 'imap-send' with 'curl' and the following configuration: [imap] folder = "[Gmail]/Drafts" host = imaps://imap.gmail.com port = 993 sslverify = false resulted in the

'git format-patch --summary' seems to be turning off the stat

The documentation for "--summary" option in the format-patch Doc states, --summary Output a condensed summary of extended header information such as creations, renames and mode changes. It doesn't state anything about turning of the stat. Why does the stat get turned off when "--summary"

[PATCH v5 2/3] rebase: distinguish user input by quoting it

Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- git-rebase.sh | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/g

[PATCH v5 3/3] rebase: rebasing can also be done when HEAD is detached

precise error message. Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> --- git-rebase.sh | 16 ++-- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deleti

  1   2   3   4   5   >