782c2d65c2
The only differences in behavior should be: - git checkout -m with non-trivial merging won't print out merge-recursive messages (see the change in t7201-co.sh) - git checkout -- paths... will give a sensible error message if HEAD is invalid as a commit. - some intermediate states which were written to disk in the shell version (in particular, index states) are only kept in memory in this version, and therefore these can no longer be revealed by later write operations becoming impossible. - when we change branches, we discard MERGE_MSG, SQUASH_MSG, and rr-cache/MERGE_RR, like reset always has. I'm not 100% sure I got the merge recursive setup exactly right; the base for a non-trivial merge in the shell code doesn't seem theoretically justified to me, but I tried to match it anyway, and the tests all pass this way. Other than these items, the results should be identical to the shell version, so far as I can tell. [jc: squashed lock-file fix from Dscho in] Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
blameview | ||
completion | ||
continuous | ||
convert-objects | ||
emacs | ||
examples | ||
fast-import | ||
gitview | ||
hg-to-git | ||
hooks | ||
p4import | ||
patches | ||
stats | ||
vim | ||
workdir | ||
README | ||
remotes2config.sh |
Contributed Software Although these pieces are available as part of the official git source tree, they are in somewhat different status. The intention is to keep interesting tools around git here, maybe even experimental ones, to give users an easier access to them, and to give tools wider exposure, so that they can be improved faster. I am not expecting to touch these myself that much. As far as my day-to-day operation is concerned, these subdirectories are owned by their respective primary authors. I am willing to help if users of these components and the contrib/ subtree "owners" have technical/design issues to resolve, but the initiative to fix and/or enhance things _must_ be on the side of the subtree owners. IOW, I won't be actively looking for bugs and rooms for enhancements in them as the git maintainer -- I may only do so just as one of the users when I want to scratch my own itch. If you have patches to things in contrib/ area, the patch should be first sent to the primary author, and then the primary author should ack and forward it to me (git pull request is nicer). This is the same way as how I have been treating gitk, and to a lesser degree various foreign SCM interfaces, so you know the drill. I expect that things that start their life in the contrib/ area to graduate out of contrib/ once they mature, either by becoming projects on their own, or moving to the toplevel directory. On the other hand, I expect I'll be proposing removal of disused and inactive ones from time to time. If you have new things to add to this area, please first propose it on the git mailing list, and after a list discussion proves there are some general interests (it does not have to be a list-wide consensus for a tool targeted to a relatively narrow audience -- for example I do not work with projects whose upstream is svn, so I have no use for git-svn myself, but it is of general interest for people who need to interoperate with SVN repositories in a way git-svn works better than git-svnimport), submit a patch to create a subdirectory of contrib/ and put your stuff there. -jc