Re: [PATCH 12/12] Revert "fetch/clone: detect dubious ownership of local repositories"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:

> To https://github.com/dscho/git
>  + c6da96aa5f0...f71d7009814 maint-2.39 -> tentative/maint-2.39 (forced update)
>  + fff57b200d1...21dc6c4d521 maint-2.40 -> tentative/maint-2.40 (forced update)
>  + 616450032a0...0d21b3451cd maint-2.41 -> tentative/maint-2.41 (forced update)
>  + b1ea89bc2d6...e9bd0c8f8c4 maint-2.42 -> tentative/maint-2.42 (forced update)
>  + 093c42a6c6b...9926037ce8c maint-2.43 -> tentative/maint-2.43 (forced update)
>  + 3c7a7b923b3...aec5a9bf52c maint-2.44 -> tentative/maint-2.44 (forced update)
>  + aeddcb02756...d3c56966d13 maint-2.45 -> tentative/maint-2.45 (forced update)
>
> This command-line comes up with no differences (meaning: you resolved the
> merge conflicts, even the ones without conflict markers, in the same way
> as I did, which is good):

Yeah, but I am afraid that it is a bit too premature to worry about
the integration to merge them up.  What's your take on the symlink
stuff Joey raised recently?

Thanks.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux