Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote: >> - you will add an option to "git bisect--helper" to perform what the >> git-bisect.sh function did, and >> - you will create a test script for "git bisect--helper" in which you >> will test each option? > > I had

Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

> - you will add an option to "git bisect--helper" to perform what the > git-bisect.sh function did, and > - you will create a test script for "git bisect--helper" in which you > will test each option? I had very initially planned to do this. But Matthieu pointed out that it would be much better

Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

latency: let time to other people to read and comment on your code. > > 2) extra-work required by reviewers. > > You want to send series early because of 1) (then you can work on the > next series while waiting for reviews on the current one), and you need > to prioritize 2) over working

Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Christian Couder <christian.cou...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.ba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hey! >> >> I have prepared a proposal for Google Summer of Code 2016. I know this >> is

Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

Christian Couder writes: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Pranit Bauva wrote: > >> Unification of bisect.c and bisect--helper.c >> >> This will unify the algorithmic and non-algorithmic parts of bisect >> bringing them under one heading to

Re: GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:27 AM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.ba...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey! > > I have prepared a proposal for Google Summer of Code 2016. I know this > is a bit late, but please try to give your comments and suggestions. > My proposal could greatly improve from

Re: [GSoC] Proposal

Well, I should have done some search before ask. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [GSoC] Proposal

Some developers are already working on that[1]. [1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/288306 On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:12 AM, 惠轶群 wrote: > There is an interesting idea as an idea for GSoC of 2008, is it still > proposable? > >

Re: [GSoC] Proposal

There is an interesting idea as an idea for GSoC of 2008, is it still proposable? https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/SoC2008Ideas#Restartable_Clone 2016-03-25 11:45 GMT+08:00 惠轶群 : > Hi, > > I'm proposing to take part in GSoC as a developer of git. > > Here is my >

[GSoC] Proposal

Hi, I'm proposing to take part in GSoC as a developer of git. Here is my [Draft](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zqOVb_cnYcaix48ep1KNPeLpRHvNKA26kNXc78yjhMg/edit?usp=sharing). I'm planning to refactor some part of git. Following is what I'm interested in: - port parts of “git rebase” to a

[GSoC] Proposal

Greetings, I hope it is not yet too late to jump on the Summer of Code bandwagon. I would appreciate comments on my application [1] and my microproject contribution, which will follow this mail as a reply. My proposal mostly stems from what was noted under "convert scripts to builtins"

GSoC proposal

As I was strongly encouraged to submit my GSoC proposal, I'll post it here and CC to my possible mentor. Please, provide with your feedback about my draft. You can also comment it right in the Google doc. Thanks in advance Proposal: https://docs.google.com/document/d

GSoC 2016 | Proposal | Incremental Rewrite of git bisect

Hey! I have prepared a proposal for Google Summer of Code 2016. I know this is a bit late, but please try to give your comments and suggestions. My proposal could greatly improve from this. Some questions: 1. Should I include more ways in which it can help windows? 2. Should I include

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

to participate in GSoC for the first time under Git is very exciting. It will give me an opportunity to intimately know the system and a chance to help in making it better and more powerful. Proposal Ideas Page: Git Beginner [10] The following tasks summarize the project: Implement a wrapper around

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

module [8] as a college minor project. >> Active Firefox Add-ons Editor at AMO [9]. >> Currently working on a restaurant image classification project as second >> college >> minor project. >> >> Why I chose Git >> >> I have been using Git for about two y

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

o years now, and it has become an > indispensable daily-use tool for me. Getting a chance to participate in GSoC > for the first time under Git is very exciting. It will give me an opportunity > to intimately know the system and a chance to help in making it better and > more > powerful. &

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

in GSoC for the first time under Git is very exciting. It will give me an opportunity to intimately know the system and a chance to help in making it better and more powerful. Proposal Ideas Page: Git Beginner [10] The following tasks summarize the project: Implement a wrapper around Git

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

On Monday 21 March 2016 01:59 PM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Sidhant Sharma writes: > >> On Monday 21 March 2016 12:22 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote: >> >>> Note that it implies writting an almost full-blown option parser to >>> recognize commands like >>> >>> ggit --work-tree git

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

Sidhant Sharma writes: > On Monday 21 March 2016 12:22 AM, Matthieu Moy wrote: > >> Note that it implies writting an almost full-blown option parser to >> recognize commands like >> >> ggit --work-tree git --namespace reset --git-dir --hard git log >> >> (just looking for

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

ecking it out > $ git checkout HEAD -- . > Reverting directory . to its last commited state Yes, I did consider that and came up with this: I thought we can have an option like --intro or --doc that will just print the intro snippet for the command without actually running. Though "git

Re: [GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

ter to let the user run "git -h" instead. But it could indeed help for commands doing very different things depending on the options, like $ git checkout foo Checks-out branch foo $ git checkout -b bar Creating a new branch bar and checking it out $ git checkout HEAD -- . Reverting dir

[GSOC/RFC] GSoC Proposal Draft | Git Beginner

Hi, I have drafted my proposal for the project 'Git Beginner', and would like to request your suggestions on improving it. I'm also reading up the Git documentation and the Git ProBook (again) to make notes for the beginner documentation. Would be great to hear your comments on it. Thanks

Re: "Medium" log format: change proposal for author != committer

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > * Enhance the "--pretty=format:" thing so that the current set of >hardcoded --pretty=medium,short,... formats and your modified >"medium" can be expressed as a custom format string. > > * Introduce a

Re: "Medium" log format: change proposal for author != committer

"Robin H. Johnson" writes: > Specifically, if the author is NOT the same as the committer, then > display both in the header. Otherwise continue to display only the > author. I too found myself wanting to see both of the names sometimes, and the "fuller" format was added

"Medium" log format: change proposal for author != committer

Hi, I want to propose a change to the 'medium' log output format, to improve readability. Specifically, if the author is NOT the same as the committer, then display both in the header. Otherwise continue to display only the author. This would aid quick review of changes in git-log & git-show

Re: Proposal for git stash : add --staged option

Hi again, just wanted to tell that I have created a solution by doing a few lines of scripting: git-cstash ``` #/bin/sh git commit -m 'temporary, will be stashed soon' git stash --include-untracked git reset HEAD^1 git stash git stash pop stash@{1} ``` Le 2015-04-22 11:25, Johannes

Please Acknowledge My Proposal!!

Please Acknowledge My Proposal!! My name is Mr. Juan Martin Domingo a lawyer resident in Spain. I am writing to let you know I have some FUNDS I want to transfer and am seeking if you can be a beneficiary...Do not hesitate to Contact me for more information if interested: gva.abogad...@aim.com

Please Acknowledge My Proposal!!

Please Acknowledge My Proposal!! My name is Mr. Juan Martin Domingo a lawyer resident in Spain. I am writing to let you know I have some FUNDS I want to transfer and am seeking if you can be a beneficiary...Do not hesitate to Contact me for more information if interested: gva.abogad...@aim.com

Re: Proposal for git stash : add --staged option

Hi, the ```sh git add config_real.xml git stash -k git reset ``` is not very well suited because the -k option to keep the index. However, the index will still be put inside the stash. So what you propose is equivalent to: ```sh git stash git stash apply stash@\{0\} git checkout

Proposal for git stash : add --staged option

Hello, There's some feature of git that I have been missing. When you have a lot of unstaged files, and would like to test what happens if you undo some of the changes that you think are unecessary, you would rather keep a copy of those changes somewhere. For example Changed but not

Re: Proposal for git stash : add --staged option

Hi Edgar, On 2015-04-22 10:30, edgar.h...@netapsys.fr wrote: When you have a lot of unstaged files, and would like to test what happens if you undo some of the changes that you think are unecessary, you would rather keep a copy of those changes somewhere. For example Changed but not

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal Draft: Unifying git branch -l, git tag -l, and git for-each-ref

On 03/26/2015 10:07 PM, Jeff King wrote: On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0530, karthik nayak wrote: All three commands select a subset of the repository’s refs and print the result. There has been an attempt to unify these commands by Jeff King[3]. I plan on continuing his work[4] and

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal Draft: Unifying git branch -l, git tag -l, and git for-each-ref

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 06:39:20PM +0530, karthik nayak wrote: All three commands select a subset of the repository’s refs and print the result. There has been an attempt to unify these commands by Jeff King[3]. I plan on continuing his work[4] and using his approach to tackle this project.

[RFC/GSoC v2] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

Since the deadline is fast approaching, and I've read that google-melange usually becomes overwhelmed near the deadline, I'll try to iterate on the proposal as much as possible. Below is v2, mostly small changes in response to Matthieu's and Junio's reviews. The changes are as follows: * Make

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com writes: I think it's still good to have the ideal in mind though (and whoops I forgot to put in the word ideal in the text). Using or not using fork is merely one of the trade-offs we can make. If all other things are equal, no fork is better than a fork is a

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

improvement in execution time on Windows. I cannot thank you enough for starting this effort. As one of the project owners of Git for Windows I can confirm the (shell) script Git commands to be a major source of pain. I really hope your proposal gets accepted and you'll be able to successfully

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com writes: I think it's still good to have the ideal in mind though (and whoops I forgot to put in the word ideal in the text). Using or not using fork is merely one of the trade-offs we can

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

Hi, On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com writes: ..., I propose the following requirements for the rewritten code: 1. No spawning of external git processes. This is to support systems with high ``fork()`` or process

[RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

on Windows. Below is the full text of the proposal as submitted to google-melange for your review and feedback. It is marked up in reStructuredText. The latest (and rendered) version can be found at [2]. Regards, Paul. [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/265628 [2] https

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

to contribute to discussions and review other than your own patches. It's nice to feel integrated in the community and not the GSoC student working alone at home ;-). Yeah I apologize for not participating in the list so actively because writing the git-pull prototype and the proposal took a fair chunk

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

Paul Tan pyoka...@gmail.com writes: ..., I propose the following requirements for the rewritten code: 1. No spawning of external git processes. This is to support systems with high ``fork()`` or process creation overhead, and to reduce redundant IO by taking advantage of the internal

Re: [RFC/GSoC] Proposal: Make git-pull and git-am builtins

your own patches. It's nice to feel integrated in the community and not the GSoC student working alone at home ;-). Yeah I apologize for not participating in the list so actively because writing the git-pull prototype and the proposal took a fair chunk of my time. Don't apologize, you're doing

[RFC/GSoC] Proposal Draft: Unifying git branch -l, git tag -l, and git for-each-ref

Hello, I have completed the micro project[1] and have also been working on adding a --literally option for cat-file[2]. I have left out the personal information part of the proposal here, will fill that in while submitting my final proposal. Currently, I have been reading about how branch -l

Re: About the proposal format of GSoc 2015

Shanti Swarup Tunga b112...@iiit-bh.ac.in writes: hey I am Shanti Swarup Tunga . I want to know is there any proposal format for Git .If not what should we focus in the proposal . You probably already found http://git.github.io/SoC-2015-Ideas.html There's no particular requirement

About the proposal format of GSoc 2015

hey I am Shanti Swarup Tunga . I want to know is there any proposal format for Git .If not what should we focus in the proposal . -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http

Fwd: [RFC] [GSoC Proposal Draft] Unifying git branch -l,git tag -l and git for-each-ref

Hi all, I have attempted a microproject [1][2] and this is my first draft of the proposal.I have included only the matter regarding my approach to solving the problem and shall add my personal details later. Please be kind enough to go through my proposal and suggest modifications or detailing

Re: Feature Proposal: Track all branches from a given remote

Hi Brian: [remote origin] fetch = refs/heads/*:refs/heads/* Yes, you're right, this works just fine as long as I move out from a branch that's not in the remote in question, for example by doing: git checkout -b nothing git fetch - OR - git pull Do you think there would be any interest

Re: Feature Proposal: Track all branches from a given remote

Scott Johnson jayw...@gmail.com writes: Do you think there would be any interest in a patch that added this as a simple command line option, though? I guess the idea of this patch then would simply change this line in the .git/config file for the length of the operation (and specified

Feature Proposal: Track all branches from a given remote

Hello git experts: Recently, I've encountered the problem where I would like to set my local repository copy to track all branches on a given remote. There does not appear to be a switch for this in the git-branch command currently, however, I will admit that my somewhat limited understanding of

Re: Feature Proposal: Track all branches from a given remote

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 04:34:30PM -0700, Scott Johnson wrote: Hello git experts: Recently, I've encountered the problem where I would like to set my local repository copy to track all branches on a given remote. There does not appear to be a switch for this in the git-branch command

I'VE A FINANCIAL PROPOSAL FOR YOU. ARE YOU INTERESTED?

I'M SORRY I CANNOT GIVE YOU IMMEDIATE DETAILS ON THE ISSUE UNTIL I CONFIRM YOUR INTEREST. BE ATTENTIVE TO THE SUBJECT LINE AND SEND YOUR REPLY ON SAME MAIL TRAIL TO AID CONTINUITY. REGARDS, MR. PETER KREMER -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a

Re: Proposal for pruning tags

On 06/05/2014 04:51 PM, Robert Dailey wrote: I've never contributed to the Git project before. I'm a Windows user, so I use msysgit, but I'd be happy to install linux just so I can help implement this feature if everyone feels it would be useful. Right now AFAIK, there is no way to prune

Re: Proposal for pruning tags

On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: I think you need to explain what you mean by prune a lot better than what you are doing in your message to be understood by others. After seeing the above two commands, my *guess* of what you want to do is to remove any

Re: Proposal for pruning tags

Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: ... Having git clean up tags automatically would really help with this, even though you may not feel it's the responsibility of Git. It's more of a usability issue, I agree with Having ... help with this. I did not say at all that it is not

Proposal for pruning tags

I've never contributed to the Git project before. I'm a Windows user, so I use msysgit, but I'd be happy to install linux just so I can help implement this feature if everyone feels it would be useful. Right now AFAIK, there is no way to prune tags through Git. The way I currently do it is like

Re: Proposal for pruning tags

Robert Dailey rcdailey.li...@gmail.com writes: I've never contributed to the Git project before. I'm a Windows user, so I use msysgit, but I'd be happy to install linux just so I can help implement this feature if everyone feels it would be useful. Right now AFAIK, there is no way to prune

Re: [RFC][GSOC] Proposal Draft for GSoC, Suggest Changes

Hello, Now that i have already submitted my proposal to GSOC , i was wondering if there is any way where i could contribute to git via bug fixes or something similar to the microprojects which was available prior to GSOC application. Also wondering if any clarification was needed as per my

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

Parts of v2, once again, i'd love some more comments on what I've rewritten On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:42 AM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 02:15:29PM -0400, Brian Bourn wrote: Going through the annals of the listserve thus far I've found a few discussions which

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

Brian Bourn ba.bo...@gmail.com writes: Something like this? Sample api calls Add_Opt_Group() Parse_with_contains() Parse_with_merged() Parse_with_no_merged() Parse_with_formatting() (each of the 4 calls above may have internal calls within the library in order to parse the option for

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Brian Bourn ba.bo...@gmail.com writes: Something like this? Sample api calls Add_Opt_Group() Parse_with_contains() Parse_with_merged() Parse_with_no_merged() Parse_with_formatting() (each of the 4 calls above may

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:03:41PM -0400, Brian Bourn wrote: What do they do, what does the caller expect to see (do they get something as return values? do they expect some side effects?)? so something like this would be better I'm assuming? Some basic sample API calls are found

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:03:41PM -0400, Brian Bourn wrote: What do they do, what does the caller expect to see (do they get something as return values? do they expect some side effects?)? so something like this would be

Re: GSoC proposal: port pack bitmap support to libgit2.

Hi, Sorry for this late reply, I was busy for past few days. On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote: On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:19:23PM +0800, Yuxuan Shui wrote: I'm Yuxuan Shui, a undergraduate student from China. I'm applying for GSoC 2014, and here is my proposal

[RFC][GSOC] Proposal Draft for GSoC, Suggest Changes

Hello, I have completed my microproject under the guidance of Eric, After going through the code and previous mailing lists. I have drafted my Proposal. Still going through the code as of now and figuring things out. Would be great to have your suggestions on my proposal, so that i can improve

[RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

Hi all, This is a first draft of my Proposal for GSoC, I'd love feedback about what I might be missing and any other files I should read regarding this, so far I have read most of tag.c, branch.c, builtin/for-each-ref.c, parse-options.c. once again I hope I can get the same amount of helpful

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

Hello again, Please it would be very helpful for me to get some comments on this proposal I would be very grateful towards anyone who could take some time to look at it, even if it's just the wording. Regards, Brian Bourn On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Brian Bourn ba.bo...@gmail.com wrote

Re: [RFC] [GSoC] Draft of Proposal for GSoC

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 02:15:29PM -0400, Brian Bourn wrote: Going through the annals of the listserve thus far I've found a few discussions which provide some insight towards this process as well as some experimental patches that never seem to have made it through[1][2][3][4] Reading the

[RFC][GSoC] Calling for comments regarding rough draft of proposal

Hi, I have already done the microproject, which has been merged into main last week. I have prepared a rough draft of my proposal for review, read all the previous mailing list threads about it.I am reading the codebase little by little. Please suggest improvements on the following topics

Re: [RFC][GSoC] Calling for comments regarding rough draft of proposal

tanay abhra tanay...@gmail.com writes: 2.Other things I should add to the proposal that I have left off?I am getting confused what extra details I should add to the proposal. I will add the informal parts(my background, schedule for summer etc) of the proposal later. I would not label

[GSoC] Choosing a Project Proposal

Hi all, I'm Currently trying to decide on a project to work on in for Google Summer of Code, I'm stuck choosing between three which I find really interesting and I was wondering if any of them are particularly more pressing then the others. I would also love some comments on each of these three

Re: GSoC proposal: port pack bitmap support to libgit2.

Hi, On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Yuxuan Shui yshu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I'm Yuxuan Shui, a undergraduate student from China. I'm applying for GSoC 2014, and here is my proposal: I found this idea on the ideas page, and did some research about it. The pack bitmap patchset add a new

Proposal: Write git subtree info to .git/config

be improved and made easier to use. I'm happy to contribute the changes myself if this proposal is acceptable. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: Proposal: Write git subtree info to .git/config

John Butterfield johnb...@gmail.com writes: Has there been any talk about adding a stub for git subtrees in .git/config? I do not think so, and that is probably for a good reason. A subtree biding can change over time, but .git/config is about recording information that do not change depending

Re: Proposal: Write git subtree info to .git/config

A subtree biding can change over time, but .git/config is about recording information that do not change depending on what tree you are looking at, so there is an impedance mismatch---storing that information in .git/config is probably a wrong way to go about it. I see. How about a .gitsubtrees

Re: Proposal: Write git subtree info to .git/config

by per folder I meant, for each subtree On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:43 PM, John Butterfield johnb...@gmail.com wrote: A subtree biding can change over time, but .git/config is about recording information that do not change depending on what tree you are looking at, so there is an impedance

Re: GSoC proposal: port pack bitmap support to libgit2.

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:19:23PM +0800, Yuxuan Shui wrote: I'm Yuxuan Shui, a undergraduate student from China. I'm applying for GSoC 2014, and here is my proposal: I found this idea on the ideas page, and did some research about it. The pack bitmap patchset add a new .bitmap file

GSoC proposal: port pack bitmap support to libgit2.

Hi, I'm Yuxuan Shui, a undergraduate student from China. I'm applying for GSoC 2014, and here is my proposal: I found this idea on the ideas page, and did some research about it. The pack bitmap patchset add a new .bitmap file for every pack file which contains the reachability information

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

think it's impossible. I'll add some more details on this to my proposal[1]. Thank you! - Brian Gesiak [1] https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/student/google/gsoc2014/modocache/5629499534213120 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

the program exits, this list is traversed and each file is closed and unlinked. It seems to me that this mechanism is appropriate for temp files in general, not just lock files. Thus, my proposal would be to extract this logic into a separate module--tempfile.h, perhaps. Lock and object files

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 05:27:05PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: Thanks for your proposal. I have a technical point that I think your proposal should address: Currently the linked list of lockfiles only grows, never shrinks. Once an object has been linked into the list, there is no way

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

temporary object files tend to have a more finely controlled lifecycle. I'm still investigating this aspect of the proposal, though. The diff tempfiles are true tempfiles; they always go away in the end (though of course we want to clean them up as we finish with them, rather than doing it all

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

to have a more finely controlled lifecycle. I'm still investigating this aspect of the proposal, though. One question, though: the idea on the ideas page specifies that temporary pack and object files may optionally be cleaned up in case of error during program execution. How will users specify

Re: [GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

that this mechanism is appropriate for temp files in general, not just lock files. Thus, my proposal would be to extract this logic into a separate module--tempfile.h, perhaps. Lock and object files would share the tempfile implementation. That is, both object and lock temp files would be stored in a linked

[GSoC14][RFC] Proposal Draft: Refactor tempfile handling

and unlinked. It seems to me that this mechanism is appropriate for temp files in general, not just lock files. Thus, my proposal would be to extract this logic into a separate module--tempfile.h, perhaps. Lock and object files would share the tempfile implementation. That is, both object and lock

Business Proposal

I am Mr. Mr. Leung Wing Lok and I work with Hang Seng Bank, Hong Kong. I have a Business Proposal of $19,500,000.00 of mutual benefits. Contact me via leungwlok...@yahoo.com.vn for more info.-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

Hi, On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: Niels Basjes wrote: As we all know the hooks ( in .git/hooks ) are not cloned along with the code of a project. Now this is a correct approach for the scripts that do stuff like emailing the people

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

) For the regular hooks this language is also support and when located in the (not cloned!) .git/hooks directory they are just as powerful as a normal script (i.e. can control CI, send emails, etc.). Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like to know what you guys think. I am

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

still think this is a nightmare of maintenance. You'd need a restricted version of a language that doesn't allow access outside the repo (and no TCP either), and someone will always miss some module... Not that it wouldn't be cool, yet. ... Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like

[Proposal] Clonable scripts

in the (not cloned!) .git/hooks directory they are just as powerful as a normal script (i.e. can control CI, send emails, etc.). Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like to know what you guys think. -- Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten, Niels Basjes -- To unsubscribe from this list

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

, etc). ... how would you prevent Ruby/Python/Go/$GeneralProgLang from executing arbitrary code? Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like to know what you guys think. I love the idea but I'm not sure how feasible it is. I think you would be forced to copy an existing language

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

kind of sandbox? Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like to know what you guys think. I love the idea but I'm not sure how feasible it is. I think you would be forced to copy an existing language and somehow make it secure (seems like a maintenance nightmare) or to create your own

Re: [Proposal] Clonable scripts

now; how can .git/hooks be as powerful as .githooks? The former users should consider uploading their code on GitHub. Like I said, this is just a proposal and I would like to know what you guys think. Best regards / Met vriendelijke groeten, Which reminds me that we need to have GitTogethers

Re: A naive proposal for preventing loose object explosions

mf...@codeaurora.org writes: Object lookups should likely not get any slower than if repack were not run, and the extra new pack might actually help find some objects quicker. In general, having an extra pack, only to keep objects that you know are available in other packs, will make _all_

Re: A naive proposal for preventing loose object explosions

On Friday, September 06, 2013 11:19:02 am Junio C Hamano wrote: mf...@codeaurora.org writes: Object lookups should likely not get any slower than if repack were not run, and the extra new pack might actually help find some objects quicker. In general, having an extra pack, only to keep

A naive proposal for preventing loose object explosions

I am imagining what I consider to be a naive approach to preventing loose unreachable object explosions. It may seem a bit heavy handed at first, but every conversation so far about this issue seems to have died, so I am looking for a simple incremental improvement to what we have today. I

My Proposal

Good day, I Am Chi Pui;Do not be surprised! I got your email contact via the World Email On-line Directory I am crediting officer at Sino Pac Bank Plc in Hong Kong and i have a deal of $17.3M to discuss with you urgently. Regards, Mr.Chi Pui -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Proposal From Mr. Gibson Mouka.

Dear Friend,   I decided to contact you to help me actualize this business for the mutual benefit of both our families. I am the Auditing and Accounting section manager in a bank, there is one of our customers who have made fixed deposit of sum of ($39.5)million for 7 years and upon maturity;

[PATCH] repack: rewrite the shell script in C (squashing proposal)

This patch is meant to be squashed into bb4335a21441a0 (repack: rewrite the shell script in C), I'll do so when rerolling the series. For reviewing I'll just send this patch. * Remove comments, which likely get out of date (authorship is kept in git anyway) * rename get_pack_filenames to

Re: [PATCH] repack: rewrite the shell script in C (squashing proposal)

Stefan Beller stefanbel...@googlemail.com writes: @@ -41,18 +35,16 @@ static void remove_temporary_files(void) DIR *dir; struct dirent *e; + dir = opendir(packdir); + if (!dir) return; + strbuf_addstr(buf, packdir); + + /* dirlen holds the

Re: Proposal: sharing .git/config

Jeff King wrote: I don't think you can avoid the 3-step problem and retain the safety in the general case. Forgetting implementation details for a minute, you have either a 1-step system: 1. Fetch and start using config from the remote. which is subject to fetching and executing

<    1   2   3   4   >