On Tue, 2006-05-30 at 17:52, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Martin Waitz <tali@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> And your approach is to backport the fix to its original topic
> >> and then re-pull the topic onto the test branch.
> >
> > yes. I was doing this after working on gitweb a bit.
> > In order to test gitweb, I need some local adaptations.
>
> Funny you mention this. I had exactly the same arrangement for
> hacking on gitweb. One "localconf" branch to tell it where the
> repositories are, "origin" to track upstream, "master" to use
> for deployment, and other topic branches.
We all do. :-)
BTW, did you (anyone?) see my patch to help the local
configuration issue some? It basically separates out the
config bits into a separate hash table in a separate file that
can be updated quite independently without even modifying
the original gitweb.cgi. That allows the gitweb.cgi
proper to be slammed down and updated much more readily.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=git&m=114308224922372&w=2
jdl
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html