Peekay Ex writes:
> David,
>
> On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:58 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>
>> [Diversion: by the way, Phil and Graham? I have come to the conclusion
>> that it is better if Patchy does not attempt any rebases or merges on
>> its own. Can you change that accordingly? It
David,
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 8:58 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
...
>
> [Diversion: by the way, Phil and Graham? I have come to the conclusion
> that it is better if Patchy does not attempt any rebases or merges on
> its own. Can you change that accordingly? It should quite simplify
> Patchy
Ian Hulin writes:
> I finally got my ssh access to savannah sorted yesterday, and I've got a
> small patch which has just gone in review and which James has marked as
> Patch-review. Now *assuming* the patch stands up to review, it would be
> ready to push in the next few days.
>
> I normally li
Ian Hulin wrote Tuesday, November 08, 2011 11:25 PM
I'd just like to check what the correct process is as I don't want
to
screw up the first thing I push. I presume the sequence would be
something like this, once I've seen the Tracker status go to
Push-patch:
# make sure master branch and r
Hi all,
I finally got my ssh access to savannah sorted yesterday, and I've got a
small patch which has just gone in review and which James has marked as
Patch-review. Now *assuming* the patch stands up to review, it would be
ready to push in the next few days.
I normally like to work on a path i
