David,
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 6:38 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:56:30PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Let's take the "David, I tested dev/staging at commit 43214314xx,
>>> and it's fine" mail scenario.
>>
>> David, I ran Patchy, and it
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:56:30PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Let's take the "David, I tested dev/staging at commit 43214314xx,
>> and it's fine" mail scenario.
>
> David, I ran Patchy, and it built commit
> cd229915fc873fdb6fd0125827452cb0ba0067a7 and it's fine.
On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:56:30PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Let's take the "David, I tested dev/staging at commit 43214314xx,
> and it's fine" mail scenario.
David, I ran Patchy, and it built commit
cd229915fc873fdb6fd0125827452cb0ba0067a7 and it's fine.
Patchy has printed out the
-
David Kastrup writes:
> Let's take the "David, I tested dev/staging at commit 43214314xx,
> and it's fine" mail scenario.
>
> What I would do then is
> git push origin 43214314xx:refs/heads/dev/staging
>
> and see whether it fails. _That_ is something you can equally well.
> The differen
Graham Percival writes:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 05:33:53PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Try the following, and please make it fail if any command returns a
>> non-zero exit status. I don't know Python at all.
>
> thanks, pushed under your name. I then added the "fail with
> non-zero" thing.
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 05:33:53PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Try the following, and please make it fail if any command returns a
> non-zero exit status. I don't know Python at all.
thanks, pushed under your name. I then added the "fail with
non-zero" thing.
I ran it briefly on my laptop and
Graham Percival writes:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 09:58:56AM +0100, 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
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 01:25:24PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Sorry to be a pest. I am currently queuing up half a dozen of other
> issues/patches, and will likely need several releases to get the
> respective conversions done in reasonable proximity to their changes.
You're not a pest, and we
Graham Percival writes:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 09:58:56AM +0100, 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
On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 09:58:56AM +0100, 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 and
10 matches
Mail list logo