Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
* rr/die-on-missing-upstream (2013-05-22) 2 commits
- sha1_name: fix error message for @{<N>}, @{<date>}
- sha1_name: fix error message for @{u}
When a reflog notation is used for implicit "current branch", we
did not say which branch and worse said "branch ''".
Waiting for series of rerolls to settle.
I'm happy with the version in pu, and I don't intend to send any
re-rolls.
OK, then I'll take a final look at it (I may or may not have
comments after doing so) before merging it down.
Is there something you're not happy with?
By the way, you probably should stop thinking in terms of "me" being
(un)happy. I am just trying to help by preventing (collectively) us
making silly mistakes.
* publish-rev: the @{push} thing is still in the early poc stages.
I presume this is the one that may someday lay foundations for Tytso's
"do not rebase beyond this point, as I have published it already"?
* for-each-ref-pretty: not ready; working with Duy.
I haven't been paying too much attention to it, but my impression
was a "superset" syntax is coming? That would be going in the right
direction.
* push-current-head: ready but for the commit message: in your
opinion, it doesn't "fix" anything other than the output. I'll
rewrite and submit soon.
I do not recall what this one is about, but we'll see when you send
it out.
* pickaxe-doc: you had some more comments in latest iteration, but the
returns from a re-roll are diminishing. Frankly, the work is too
boring: the first few iterations were interesting, because I was
learning;...
Yeah, some parts of the project is boring and that is not a news.
Think of documentation updates as helping others to learn.
Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
Is there something you're not happy with?
By the way, you probably should stop thinking in terms of "me" being
(un)happy. I am just trying to help by preventing (collectively) us
making silly mistakes.
As a general principle, okay.
IIRC, nobody else had comments on this one.
quoted
* publish-rev: the @{push} thing is still in the early poc stages.
I presume this is the one that may someday lay foundations for Tytso's
"do not rebase beyond this point, as I have published it already"?
Yep. More importantly, I'll get something I've been wanting badly:
the tracking info in the prompt.
quoted
* for-each-ref-pretty: not ready; working with Duy.
I haven't been paying too much attention to it, but my impression
was a "superset" syntax is coming? That would be going in the right
direction.
Yes, a superset with coming with one caveat: %ae will be interpreted
as hex. I hope to send a large'ish series that also strips out the
-v, -vv code. Duy basically did most of the work by coming up with a
brilliant way to inject into the pretty-formats machinery.
quoted
* pickaxe-doc: you had some more comments in latest iteration, but the
returns from a re-roll are diminishing. Frankly, the work is too
boring: the first few iterations were interesting, because I was
learning;...
Yeah, some parts of the project is boring and that is not a news.
Think of documentation updates as helping others to learn.
See, the problem is that I might drop the ball on patches like this
(I've done it before, when I thought the change wasn't important
enough for me to bore myself). This is definitely important, and I
will see it to completion. But I'm echoing a more general problem:
If people don't feel like working on it, how will the documentation
improve? And if the pickaxe-doc was in such bad shape, how could
anyone have been using it? Do an internet search and see for
yourself. This feature is _extremely_ useful, and it's a real shame
that it has been so poorly documented for this long.
I'm not advocating a lax review that checks in technically incorrect
documentation; that will confuse users and turn it into a huge
maintenance burden. But we can maybe go down a notch on style?