On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 4:14 AM, Jeff Hostetler wrote:
> Also, does this introduce any new cases for reporting conflicts?
> I haven't really thought about it too much yet, but if there was a
> divergent rename in both branches of a merge, do we now have to handle
> showing
On 12/27/2017 1:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Duy Nguyen writes:
Or we disable rename-from-worktree when porcelain v2 is requested (and
optionally introduce v3 to support it). Jeff, any preference?
Sorry for the delay, I was on vacation last week.
I like the "R." and
Duy Nguyen writes:
>> The problem is, you cannot know if it's a rename from HEAD or from
>> worktree with this updated v2 (or perhaps you could because HEAD name
>> should be all zero?).
>
> I'm wrong about this. the "" code for HEAD rename would be "R."
> while worktree
Duy Nguyen writes:
> Or we disable rename-from-worktree when porcelain v2 is requested (and
> optionally introduce v3 to support it). Jeff, any preference?
I actually think disabling rename-from-worktree consistently may be
the best way to go.
On 2017-12-25 11:37, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
[]
> wt-status.c | 24 +++-
> wt-status.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t2203-add-intent.sh b/t/t2203-add-intent.sh
> index 1bdf38e80d..41a8874e60 100755
>
On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 07:26:27PM +0100, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
>> But I`ve noticed that "--porcelain=v2" output might still be buggy -
>> this is what having both files staged shows:
>>
>> $ git status --porcelain=v2
>>
On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 07:26:27PM +0100, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
> But I`ve noticed that "--porcelain=v2" output might still be buggy -
> this is what having both files staged shows:
>
> $ git status --porcelain=v2
> 2 R. N... 100644 100644 100644 12f00e90b6ef79117ce6e650416b8cf517099b78
On 25/12/2017 20:45, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
>
> I guess an additional test for this would be good, too.
... aaand here it is. Again based on your test, but please double
check, I`m not sure if it`s ok to compare file modes like that,
expecting them to be the same (hashes should be fine, I
On 25/12/2017 19:26, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
>
> But I`ve noticed that "--porcelain=v2" output might still be buggy -
> this is what having both files staged shows:
>
> $ git status --porcelain=v2
> 2 R. N... 100644 100644 100644 12f00e90b6ef79117ce6e650416b8cf517099b78
>
Hi Duy,
On 25/12/2017 11:37, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Before 425a28e0a4 (diff-lib: allow ita entries treated as "not yet exist
> in index" - 2016-10-24) there are never "new files" in the index, which
> essentially disables rename detection because we only detect renames
> when a new file
Before 425a28e0a4 (diff-lib: allow ita entries treated as "not yet exist
in index" - 2016-10-24) there are never "new files" in the index, which
essentially disables rename detection because we only detect renames
when a new file appears in a diff pair.
After that commit, an i-t-a entry can
11 matches
Mail list logo