Re: Sort output of diff --stat?

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 1:47 PM Jeff King wrote: > Hmm, I feel like another person asked for this recently, but I can't > seem to find the thread. Is it this one? https://www.mail-archive.com/git@vger.kernel.org/msg159212.html That's the only one I was able to find, but no one replied. Thanks

Sort output of diff --stat?

I'd like to sort the output of `git diff --stat` such that files are listed in descending order based on number of lines changed. The closest solution I've found online[1] has several readability issues. I'd rather see a built-in solution in git, if one exists. Can anyone recommend a solution?

Re: Automatic core.autocrlf?

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:54 PM Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > Hi, > > Robert Dailey wrote: > > > Is there an 'auto' setting for the 'core.autocrlf' config? Reason I > > ask is, I want that setting to be 'input' on linux but 'true' on > > Windows. > > O

Re: Automatic core.autocrlf?

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:32 PM Andrei Rybak wrote: > > On 2018-08-27 17:52, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 5:37 PM Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > >>> In those cases, when it falls back to > >>> configuration for line ending management, I want it to be > >>> automatically

Re: Automatic core.autocrlf?

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:53 AM Duy Nguyen wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 5:37 PM Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > > > In those cases, when it falls back to > > > configuration for line ending management, I want it to be > > > automatically configured based on the host platform. > > > > There

Automatic core.autocrlf?

Is there an 'auto' setting for the 'core.autocrlf' config? Reason I ask is, I want that setting to be 'input' on linux but 'true' on Windows. I have a global .gitconfig that I sync across different platforms with Google Drive, and I hate to manage 2 copies of it on each platform (linux and

Re: Fetch on submodule update

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Robert Dailey wrote: > >> Automatic would be >> great if submodules were treated as integrated in a similar manner to >> subtree, but it's not there. I wasn't awar

Re: Fetch on submodule update

On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:08 AM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > I think I misread this the first time. I got distracted by your > mention of the --remote option, but you mentioned you want to use the > SHA-1 of the submodule listed, so that was silly of me. > > I think you'll find that "git fetch

Fetch on submodule update

Problem: I want to avoid recursively fetching submodules when I run a `fetch` command, and instead defer that operation to the next `submodule update`. Essentially I want `fetch.recurseSubmodules` to be `false`, and `get submodule update` to do exactly what it does with the `--remote` option, but

Patch add: previous hunk across file boundaries

I noticed that when stepping into a new file while doing `git add -p`, pressing `k` or `K` does not go back to the previous file. Is this a bug? Is there a setting for it? I googled & checked out the git docs, I didn't find any specific information on this.

Re: Need help debugging issue in git

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 1:53 AM, Johannes Sixt <j...@kdbg.org> wrote: > Am 02.04.2018 um 02:36 schrieb Robert Dailey: >> >> I'm struggling with a bug that I found introduced in git v2.13.2. The >> bug was not reproducible in v2.13.1. The issue is that using arguments

Re: [PATCH] Support long format for log-based submodule diff

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Stefan Beller wrote: >> >> $ git diff --submodule=log --submodule-log-detail=(long|short) >> >> >> >> I'm not sure what makes sense here. I welcome thoughts/discussion and >> >> will provide follow-up patches. >> > >> > The case of merges is

Need help debugging issue in git

I'm struggling with a bug that I found introduced in git v2.13.2. The bug was not reproducible in v2.13.1. The issue is that using arguments like "@{-1}" to aliases causes those curly braces to be removed, so once the command is executed after alias processing the argument looks like "@-1". This

Re: Rename of file is causing changes to be lost

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 11:51 AM, Elijah Newren wrote: > Anyway, I recorded this at > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/git/issues/detail?id=11. Sorry I don't > have a workaround, but I'll try to eventually get back to this and fix > it. Thank you for taking the time to verify this

Re: Rename of file is causing changes to be lost

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm on Windows and core.ignorecase is set to 'true' when I clone/init > a repository. I've got a branch where I started making changes to a > file AND renamed it only to change its case. The changes I

Rename of file is causing changes to be lost

I'm on Windows and core.ignorecase is set to 'true' when I clone/init a repository. I've got a branch where I started making changes to a file AND renamed it only to change its case. The changes I've made were significant enough that git no longer detects a rename, instead the files show up as "D"

[PATCH] Support long format for log-based submodule diff

-log Or a supplementary option such as: $ git diff --submodule=log --submodule-log-detail=(long|short) I'm not sure what makes sense here. I welcome thoughts/discussion and will provide follow-up patches. Signed-off-by: Robert Dailey <rcdai...@gmail.com> --- submodule.c | 3 ++- 1 file c

Re: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Implement CMake build

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Isaac Hier wrote: > Hi Jeff, > > I have been looking at the build generator, which looks promising, but > I have one concern. Assuming I can generate a CMakeLists.txt that > appropriately updates the library sources, etc. how do you suggest I

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Torsten Bögershausen <tbo...@web.de> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 09:24:40AM -0600, Robert Dailey wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > > [] >> >> Sorry to bring this ol

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I think the message you are referring to is a tangent that discusses > how it was done in the old world, with issues that come from the > fact that with such an approach the paths are first removed from the > index and

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Torsten Bögershausen writes: > >>> $ git rm -r --cached . && git add . >> >> (Both should work) >> >> To be honest, from the documentation, I can't figure out the difference >> between >> $ git read-tree

An option to ignore submodules in stash push?

I haven't seen such an option, but I think it would be nice to be able to ignore submodules when creating a stash. When I stash changes in a directory, almost always I intend to only stash real files, not modified submodules. When I pop the stash later, it gets disrupted due to submodule

Re: Can't squash merge with merge.ff set to false

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Bryan Turner wrote: > The two _aren't_ distinctly separate, though. "git merge --squash > --ff-only" has very different semantics to "git merge --squash --ff", > in that it will only create a new squashed commit (or fast-forward a > single

Re: Can't squash merge with merge.ff set to false

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Paul Smith <p...@mad-scientist.net> wrote: > On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 12:12 -0800, Bryan Turner wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Not sure if this is inten

Can't squash merge with merge.ff set to false

Not sure if this is intended or a bug, but with the following configuration: $ git config --global merge.ff false I am not able to merge my topic branch into master with squash option: $ git checkout master $ git merge --squash topic fatal: You cannot combine --squash with --no-ff. I'm not

Previous hunk in different file during add --patch

I keep expecting that pressing K during patch add that it will cross file boundaries and go to previous hunks in files before the current one. However, it reports "no hunks" when reaching the top hunk in the current file. Is there a way to go to the previous file?

Usability issue with rebase fork-point option

When upstream is not specified for the rebase command (e.g. I just do `git rebase`), `--fork-point` is assumed which results in commits regenerating SHA1 even if the merge-base would otherwise be identical. Here's my scenario: I set my remote tracking branch to my parent branch: $ git branch -u

How to resolve mixture of modified and deleted conflicts easily in git?

When doing a rebase, sometimes I will get `DU` and `UU` conflicts (locally deleted and locally modified, respectively). Furthermore, in some of these cases, I want to take "ours" for all conflicts, including ones where the local file is deleted. Ideally, it's just one command: $ git checkout

Multiple ways to undo changes to a file in the tip commit

Suppose the tip commit of my branch contains changes to multiple files. If I want to revert all changes in one file from that commit, I have two options that I know of: $ git reset @^ -- foo.txt $ git commit --amend --no-edit $ git checkout -- foo.txt Or: $ git checkout @^ -- foo.txt $ git

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Robert Dailey wrote: > >> You guys are obviously worlds ahead of me on the internals of things, >> but from my perspective I like to avoid the "plumbing" commands

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Torsten Bögershausen writes: > >>> $ git rm -r --cached . && git add . >> >> (Both should work) >> >> To be honest, from the documentation, I can't figure out the difference >> between >> $ git read-tree

Re: Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > The short version is, that the instructions on Github are outdated. > This is the official procedure (since 2016, Git v2.12 or so) > But it should work even with older version of Git. > > $ echo "* text=auto"

Line ending normalization doesn't work as expected

I'm on Windows using Git for Windows v2.13.1. Following github's recommended process for fixing line endings after adding a `.gitattributes` file[1], I run the following: $ rm .git/index && git reset Once I run `git status`, I see that no files have changed. Note that I know for a fact in my

Re: Rebase & submodules

On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Nicolas Morey-Chaisemartin wrote: > Without changing your workflow too much, If you mean to imply that you have other recommendations if I'm willing to change my workflow, then please by all means share them. I'm very interested. I'm

Rebase & submodules

So I often will have a submodule that points to one of my own forks, because I will have work done on a feature branch that hasn't been merged upstream yet. Assuming this merge takes a long time to get approved, I will occasionally rebase my topic branch to keep things up to date and clean.

gitmodules below root directory

The gitmodules documentation[1] states that the .gitmodules file is at the root. However, it would be nice if this could be supported in any directory similar to how .gitignore works. Right now git-subrepo does not support submodules inside of a subrepo[2] (I suspect subtrees would have the same

subrepo vs submodule

So I found out about "subrepo" today: https://github.com/ingydotnet/git-subrepo I'm still reading about how it works internally, but what do you guys think about it? Is it a more or less perfect alternative to submodules? What would be a reason not to use it?

Re: Better usability of stash refs

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 03:32:54PM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: > >> To drop a stash, I have to do this (example): >> >> $ git stash drop stash@{3} >> >> Using the full "stash

Better usability of stash refs

To drop a stash, I have to do this (example): $ git stash drop stash@{3} Using the full "stash@{N}" seems superfluous since the documentation states it must be a stash in the first place. It would make more sense (and be quicker to type) to do: $ git stash drop 3 Is there a trick I can use to

Re: How to git push mirror local refs only?

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> writes: > >> So I want to update my remote fork with all my local branches. >> Normally I'd do this: >> >> $ git push --mirror fork &g

How to git push mirror local refs only?

So I want to update my remote fork with all my local branches. Normally I'd do this: $ git push --mirror fork However this will also push everything under `refs/remotes` which I do not want. And it fails if I specify a refspec parameter with --mirror. Is there a way to achieve this through one

Re: Hide decorations in git log

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > Is it possible to hide decorated refs in `git log` even if they are > reachable from the refs I'm actually interested in seeing the logs of? > > For example, if I do `git log --gr

Hide decorations in git log

Hello, Is it possible to hide decorated refs in `git log` even if they are reachable from the refs I'm actually interested in seeing the logs of? For example, if I do `git log --graph --decorate --oneline --branches 'feature/*'`, I'd like to *only* see refnames that match the glob pattern.

Re: Diff topic branch + working copy changes?

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Junio, I forgot about merge-base. I'll create some aliases for now: > > # Diff Branch > db = "!f() { : git diff ; git diff $(git merge-base @{upstream} > HEAD) ; }; f&q

Re: Diff topic branch + working copy changes?

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 9:47 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> writes: > >> So for a topic branch based on master, I can diff ONLY my changes on >> the topic branch by doing this simple command: >> >>

Diff topic branch + working copy changes?

So for a topic branch based on master, I can diff ONLY my changes on the topic branch by doing this simple command: $ git diff origin/master... However, this does not include uncommitted working copy changes. To work around this, I can do this instead: $ git diff origin/master (No three-dot

Re: Best "triangle" workflow setup?

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 6:36 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 04:23:03PM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: > >> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: >> > I think you want: >> > >> &g

Re: Best "triangle" workflow setup?

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Jeff King wrote: > I think you want: > > [push] > default = current > [remote] > pushDefault = myfork > > to make "git push" do what you want. And then generally have branches > mark their counterparts on "origin" (which you can do either at

Best "triangle" workflow setup?

I know Git has evolved to support the "triangle" workflow model in different ways, with the goal of making it better. However because there are so many different options from separate push URLs for remotes to various ways to manage tracking branches, it's not clear to me which specific

Re: Finding a tag that introduced a submodule change

On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Sometimes I run into a situation where I need to find out which >> release of the product a submodule change was introduced in

git pretty format: "%+b" not working with "%w" in front of it?

I have the following log: $ git log commit 7ffb909bb8f38607e3d6d9f3504a66ca978f0ac2 Author: Robert Dailey <rob...@ziosk.com> Date: Mon Dec 12 11:01:00 2016 -0600 Add initial skeleton files & a few interfaces for new kizi/sc16 stuff This is still FAR from complete...

Finding a tag that introduced a submodule change

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 since multiple other products may be using it there and I wanted to avoid ambiguous

Re: Rebasing a branch with merges

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Philip Oakley <philipoak...@iee.org> wrote: > From: "Robert Dailey" <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> >> >> Here's the scenario: >> >> I create a topic branch so one other developer and myself can work on >> a fea

Rebasing a branch with merges

Here's the scenario: I create a topic branch so one other developer and myself can work on a feature that takes 2 weeks to complete. During that 2 week period, changes are occurring on master that I need in my topic branch. Since I have a collaborator on the branch, I opt for merges instead of

v2.11 new diff heuristic?

The release notes mention a new heuristic for diff: * Output from "git diff" can be made easier to read by selecting which lines are common and which lines are added/deleted intelligently when the lines before and after the changed section are the same. A command line option is added to help with

Re: Integrating submodules with no side effects

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Robert Dailey >> <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On We

Re: Integrating submodules with no side effects

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Robert Dailey > <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: >>> You

Re: Integrating submodules with no side effects

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Stefan Beller wrote: > You could try this patch series: > https://github.com/jlehmann/git-submod-enhancements/tree/git-checkout-recurse-submodules > (rebased to a newer version; no functional changes:) >

Re: Integrating submodules with no side effects

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Robert Dailey > <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hello git experts, >> >> I have in the past attempted to integrate submodules into my primary &g

Integrating submodules with no side effects

Hello git experts, I have in the past attempted to integrate submodules into my primary repository using the same directory name. However, this has always caused headache when going to and from branches that take you between when this integration occurred and when it didn't. It's a bit hard to

Git log exclude/remotes/branches options not working as expected

I have 3 remotes registered in my clone: origin, fork, drive When I do: $ git log --oneline --decorate --graph I only want to see branches under: refs/heads/* refs/remotes/origin/* I tried the following: $ git log --oneline --decorate --graph --simplify-by-decoration --remote=origin

Can we make interactive add easier to use?

Normally when I use interactive add, I just want to add files to the index via simple numbers, instead of typing paths. So I'll do this as quick as I can: 1. Type `git add -i` 2. Press `u` after prompt appears 3. Press numbers for the files I want to add, ENTER key 4. ENTER key again to go back

Re: Fixup of a fixup not working right

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Perhaps a change like this to "rebase -i": > > - The search for "original" when handling "pick fixup! original", >when it does not find "original", could turn it into "reword >fixup! original" without changing its

Fixup of a fixup not working right

Suppose I have a branch with 4 commits, in the following order (as you might see during interactive rebase): pick 123 Original Change pick 789 fixup! Original Change pick 456 Some Other Thing pick abc fixup! fixup! Original Change However, let's say the first commit is already pushed upstream on

Re: diff using 3-dot behavior

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > The 3-dot notation means: > > Show the difference between the merge-base of master and topic, and topic. > > I'm not completely sure, but I guess what you want is: > > Show the difference between the merge-base

diff using 3-dot behavior

I want to view the complete diff of my branch (topic) relative to its parent branch (master). This should include cached/staged files and unstaged working tree changes. If I do this: $ git diff master This will include changes on master *since* my last merge, which I do not want (I don't want

Re: diff --diff-filter on modified but locally deleted files

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> writes: > >> My use case is that I do a merge from branch A to branch B. Branch A >> modified a file which is already deleted on B some time before

diff --diff-filter on modified but locally deleted files

My use case is that I do a merge from branch A to branch B. Branch A modified a file which is already deleted on B some time before the merge. When I do a `git status -sb`, these locally deleted but remotely modified files show up as "DU". I want to invoke git status or diff (or something else)

Re: git add without whitespace

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I have had this in my ~/.gitconfig for a long time. > > [alias] > wsadd = "!sh -c 'git diff -- \"$@\" | git apply --cached > --whitespace=fix;\ > git co -- ${1-.} \"$@\"' -" > > That is, "take

git add without whitespace

I think it would be useful to have a '-w' option for 'git add' that completely ignores whitespace changes, the same way that 'git diff -w' does. Real life scenario: Sometimes developers will use tooling that does not properly strip trailing whitespace in source files. Next time I edit those

Best Practices with code/build fixes post-merge?

Sometimes, I merge 2 branches that have deviated quite a bit. A worst-case example would be some API change. The topic branch (long-lived) may start using the old API. However, once I merge the topic back to master, that API no longer exists. As such, every place that introduces a usage of the old

Re: Git log three-dot notation: include merge base

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> writes: > >> This is because the merge base commit isn't shown. I understand this >> is "by-design", but is there a way to include it? It's

Git log three-dot notation: include merge base

If you consider a simple case where I run the following command: $ git log --oneline --graph --decorate A...B Where A and B are both branches with a single merge base and a series of commits on each branch. Very simple example with no loops or crazy ancestry. Below is an example repo I set up,

Re: How to use @{-1} with push?

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I thought these are clear from their documentation. "push" works on > refnames, "branch" works on branch names. "push" takes an branch > name as a short-hand and adds refs/heads/ when it makes sense, but > because it

Re: How to use @{-1} with push?

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: >> You can ask rev-parse to give you --symbolic-full-name, error out if >> it is empty (i.e. detached HEAD), a

Re: How to use @{-1} with push?

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > You can ask rev-parse to give you --symbolic-full-name, error out if > it is empty (i.e. detached HEAD), and otherwise use the result, no? > > $ git checkout next > $ git checkout master > $ git rev-parse

How to use @{-1} with push?

I have an alias that I'm working on to do a push and delete of a topic branch: # Push HEAD, delete branch local & remote # # $1 = remote name # $2 = branch name pushdel = "!f() { : git push ; git push \"$1\" HEAD \":$2\" && git branch -d \"$2\" ; }; f" I use it after I

How can I get a list of checkout history?

As you know, I can checkout the Nth checked out branch via this syntax: $ git checkout @{-N} Is there a built-in mechanism to get a listing of previously checked out refs? Basically, this would be similar to 'history' command in linux where instead of actual commands, it lists like this:

git clean without ignored files

I noticed that `git clean` does not handle a specific scenario. I have the following types of untracked entities in my working copy: * Untracked files in tracked directories (non-recursive; sibling files are tracked) * Untracked files in untracked directories (recursive) * Ignored files meeting

Convenient shortcut to push delete current branch?

For convenient pushing of current branch, git supports this syntax: $ git push origin HEAD This will push your current branch up. However, is there such a shortcut for *deleting* the branch? The only goal here is to avoid having to type the branch name in the push command. Normally I rely on tab

Re: Convenient shortcut to push delete current branch?

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Robert Dailey <rcdailey.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> For convenient pushing of current branch, git supports this syntax: >> >> $ git push origin HE

git submodule init --recursive?

I have a few nested submodules, all use relative URLs such as: ../mysubmodule.git ../../tools/tool1.git If I change my parent repo URL, I need to recursively update all remotes in each submodule. There is no `--recursive` option for `git submodule init`. What is the recommend method for

Re: git submodule init --recursive?

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: I have a few nested submodules, all use relative URLs such as: ../mysubmodule.git ../../tools/tool1.git If I change my parent repo URL, I need to recursively update all remotes in each submodule

'eol' documentation confusion

Upon inspection of the gitattributes documentation page here: https://git-scm.com/docs/gitattributes When comparing the documentation for 'text' with 'eol', I see the following missing explanations for 'eol': * eol * -eol Maybe the fact that these are missing means they are not valid to use.

Re: 'eol' documentation confusion

On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 9:04 AM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: Upon inspection of the gitattributes documentation page here: https://git-scm.com/docs/gitattributes When comparing the documentation for 'text' with 'eol', I see the following missing explanations for 'eol

Re: Git completion not using ls-remote to auto-complete during push

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:29 AM, SZEDER Gábor sze...@ira.uka.de wrote: Quoting Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com I do the following: $ git push origin :topic If I stop halfway through typing 'topic' and hit TAB, auto-completion does not work if I do not have a local branch by that name

Re: Git completion not using ls-remote to auto-complete during push

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 10:55 AM, SZEDER Gábor sze...@ira.uka.de wrote: Quoting Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com: On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:29 AM, SZEDER Gábor sze...@ira.uka.de wrote: Quoting Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com I do the following: $ git push origin :topic

Git completion not using ls-remote to auto-complete during push

I do the following: $ git push origin :topic If I stop halfway through typing 'topic' and hit TAB, auto-completion does not work if I do not have a local branch by that name (sometimes I delete my local branch first, then I push to delete it remotely). I thought that git completion code was

Re: Diffing submodule does not yield complete logs for merge commits

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: In the meantime I'd like to ask, do we even need to add an option for this? What if we just

Re: Diffing submodule does not yield complete logs for merge commits

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: In the meantime I'd like to ask, do we even need to add an option for this? What if we just make `diff.submodule log` not use --first-parent? This seems like a backward

Re: Diffing submodule does not yield complete logs for merge commits

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 12:04 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: In the meantime I'd like to ask, do we even need

Re: Diffing submodule does not yield complete logs for merge commits

On 5/21/2015 7:51 AM, Heiko Voigt wrote: On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 02:29:55PM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 5:44 AM, Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:06:32AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: Unfortunately I find it unintuitive and counter

How are submodule conflicts resolved during rebase?

Hey guys, I'm using Git for Windows 2.3.6. There is a bit of confusion I have with regards to how submodule conflicts are resolved/handled during a rebase. Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits contain a change to the same (and only) submodule in the repository. When

Re: How are submodule conflicts resolved during rebase?

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: Hey guys, I'm using Git for Windows 2.3.6. There is a bit of confusion I have with regards to how submodule conflicts are resolved/handled during a rebase. Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3

Re: How are submodule conflicts resolved during rebase?

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Heiko Voigt hvo...@hvoigt.net wrote: On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 09:34:06AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: Suppose I have a branch with 10 commits on it, 3 of those commits contain a change to the same (and only) submodule in the repository. When I rebase this branch

Re: Rebasing with submodule change causes red herring with --continue

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 5:43 PM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 09:35:38PM +0100, John Keeping wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 09:43:44PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote: Am 23.04.2015 um 21:07 schrieb Robert Dailey: On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Robert Dailey

Re: Rebasing with submodule change causes red herring with --continue

On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:44 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:30:20AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: I have a branch that contains a commit with a single change: A submodule pointing to a new SHA1. When I rebase this branch onto the tip of its parent branch

Re: Rebasing with submodule change causes red herring with --continue

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:44 AM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 11:30:20AM -0500, Robert Dailey wrote: I have a branch that contains a commit with a single change: A submodule

Re: Need help deciding between subtree and submodule

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Doug Kelly dougk@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Chris Packham judge.pack...@gmail.com wrote: My $0.02 based on $dayjob (disclaimer I've never used subtree) On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com

Need help deciding between subtree and submodule

At my workplace, the team is using Atlassian Stash + git We have a Core library that is our common code between various projects. To avoid a single monolithic repository and to allow our apps and tools to be modularized into their own repos, I have considered moving Core to a subtree or

  1   2   >