comment, a
"conversation" can be had with subsequent comments (that's usually easier than
using the "general" comments section when talking about an issue.
Michael
-----Original Message-
From: Thomas Wiens
To: wireshark-dev
Sent: Sat, Aug 23, 2014 11:39 am
Subject
On 22 August 2014 16:44, Bill Meier wrote:
>
> See my comment to you on the new patch
>
> https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/3794/
>
I've got a question to the "Reply 'Done'" Button in gerrit.
Should I use it when I think I've fixed what's mentioned in the comment,
or is/should it done by t
On 8/22/2014 10:15 AM, Thomas Wiens wrote:
On 22 August 2014 16:05, wrote Graham Bloice:
As I noted on the review, I think you must have removed the Change-ID: line
from the commit message that Gerrit uses to track a new patch set for an
existing change.
You should have used `git commit --amen
On 22 August 2014 16:05, wrote Graham Bloice:
> As I noted on the review, I think you must have removed the Change-ID: line
> from the commit message that Gerrit uses to track a new patch set for an
> existing change.
>
> You should have used `git commit --amend` to commit and use the existing
>
On 08/22/14 09:51, Thomas Wiens wrote:
Hi,
I've just commited a fixed version.
I think I did something wrong. In the review system it is shown as a new
version.
I used:
git commit -a
git review
If you were on the same branch as your original commit (or if you
re-downloaded your change with "g
On 22 August 2014 14:51, Thomas Wiens wrote:
> Hi,
> I've just commited a fixed version.
> I think I did something wrong. In the review system it is shown as a new
> version.
>
> I used:
> git commit -a
> git review
>
>
As I noted on the review, I think you must have removed the Change-ID: line
f
Hi,
I've just commited a fixed version.
I think I did something wrong. In the review system it is shown as a new
version.
I used:
git commit -a
git review
--
Thomas
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev mailing list
Archives:h
On 8/22/2014 5:22 AM, Graham Bloice wrote:
On 22 August 2014 10:18, Thomas Wiens mailto:th.wi...@gmx.de>> wrote:
I've got another question to working on the comments in the review
system:
Is it good style to push every fixed comment as a single commit, or
should I work on all c
On 22 August 2014 10:18, Thomas Wiens wrote:
> On 22 August 2014 00:03, Graham Bloice wrote:
>
> > Create a batch file containing something like:
> >
> > REM Environment setup for Wireshark using VS2010
> > set CYGWIN=nodosfilewarning
> > set WIRESHARK_BASE_DIR=E:\Wireshark
> > set WIRESHARK_TARG
On 22 August 2014 00:03, Graham Bloice wrote:
> Create a batch file containing something like:
>
> REM Environment setup for Wireshark using VS2010
> set CYGWIN=nodosfilewarning
> set WIRESHARK_BASE_DIR=E:\Wireshark
> set WIRESHARK_TARGET_PLATFORM=win32
> set QT5_BASE_DIR=C:\qt\Qt-5.1.1-MSVC2010-
On 21 August 2014 21:36, Christopher Maynard
wrote:
> Thomas Wiens writes:
>
> > On 21 August 2014 21:41, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> >
> > > For the short term, I'd suggest doing:
> > >
> > > git stash
> > > git review [-f]
> > > git stash pop
> > >
> > > There might be a better answer longer term--m
On 08/21/14 16:00, Thomas Wiens wrote:
What is the best way to share samples for my dissector, in the wireshark
wiki? Should I create a site for this protocol, although it's only in
review?
A site for your protocol would be good but the sample captures should go
on the SampleCaptures page--I t
Thomas Wiens writes:
> On 21 August 2014 21:41, Jeff Morriss wrote:
>
> > For the short term, I'd suggest doing:
> >
> > git stash
> > git review [-f]
> > git stash pop
> >
> > There might be a better answer longer term--maybe one of the guys who
> > actually uses Windows has practical sugges
Thus wrote Thomas Wiens (th.wi...@gmx.de):
> I thought, with "git add " I am saying: "look only on this files"
> and ignore all others.
No, that's what you say with "svn add". svn tracks files, git tracks
changes. git add means "add the changes I made to this file into
the next commit".
> What
On 21 August 2014 21:41, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> For the short term, I'd suggest doing:
>
> git stash
> git review [-f]
> git stash pop
>
> There might be a better answer longer term--maybe one of the guys who
> actually uses Windows has practical suggestion.
It works! Thanks.
Is that a problem
On 08/21/14 15:21, Thomas Wiens wrote:
On 21 August 2014 21:10, Jeff Morriss wrote:
What does "git status" say at this point?
Thomas@VORTEX /c/Development/wireshark (s7comm)
$ git status
On branch s7comm
Changes not staged for commit:
(use "git add ..." to update what will be committed)
On 21 August 2014 21:10, Jeff Morriss wrote:
> What does "git status" say at this point?
>
Thomas@VORTEX /c/Development/wireshark (s7comm)
$ git status
On branch s7comm
Changes not staged for commit:
(use "git add ..." to update what will be committed)
(use "git checkout -- ..." to discard c
On 08/21/14 13:38, Thomas Wiens wrote:
I've got gerrit review running, and commited the files via git. But "git
review" failed.
Any suggestions?
That's what I've done, after I have added the files to git:
Thomas@VORTEX /c/Development/wireshark (s7comm)
$ git status
On branch s7comm
Changes to b
On 21 August 2014 16:25, Graham Bloice wrote:
> Don't confuse git and Gerrit. Use git to add files to your staging area
> and then commit them to your repository, and then push the commit to
> Gerrit, where the Gerrit review process takes over.
I've got gerrit review running, and commited the fi
On 21 August 2014 15:04, Thomas Wiens wrote:
> On 21 August 2014 15:14, Graham Bloice wrote:
>
> > Have a look at the Wiki page on submitting patches:
> > http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/SubmittingPatches which advises
> using
> > the Gerrit helper git-review
> >
>
> Oh man, that's a hard t
On 21 August 2014 15:14, Graham Bloice wrote:
> Have a look at the Wiki page on submitting patches:
> http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/SubmittingPatches which advises using
> the Gerrit helper git-review
>
Oh man, that's a hard task to upload 4 files.
Is this review addon absolute necessar
On 21 August 2014 14:09, Thomas Wiens wrote:
> On 21 August 2014 14:46, Michal Orynicz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > the best line of doing this would be going to
> > https://code.wireshark.org/review/, registering there and then pushing
> Your
> > change to https://code.wireshark.org/review/wireshark . Thi
On 21 August 2014 14:46, Michal Orynicz wrote:
> Hi,
> the best line of doing this would be going to
> https://code.wireshark.org/review/, registering there and then pushing Your
> change to https://code.wireshark.org/review/wireshark . This way the
> changes will go through review in gerrit, and n
... or do it with ssh protocol, just as You described it.
On 21 August 2014 14:46, Michal Orynicz wrote:
> Hi,
> the best line of doing this would be going to
> https://code.wireshark.org/review/, registering there and then pushing
> Your change to https://code.wireshark.org/review/wireshark .
Hi,
the best line of doing this would be going to
https://code.wireshark.org/review/, registering there and then pushing Your
change to https://code.wireshark.org/review/wireshark . This way the
changes will go through review in gerrit, and no matter how bad or how good
Your code is, it will stay t
Hi,
I have written a dissector for a protocol which I call "S7 communication".
I've hosted it as plugin dll at sourceforge, but I think the better way
is to contribute it direct into wireshark (if it's good enough).
I've changed the dissector from plugin to internal and did the
testtools, so I thi
26 matches
Mail list logo
