Re: What's in git.git

"Horst H. von Brand" [off-list ref] writes:

David Lang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

[pu]

 Johannes's shallow clone work now should rebase cleanly on top
 of 'master' although I haven't done so yet.  As he said
 himself the series is waiting for people who have needs for
 such a feature to raise hands.

I haven't been watching this recently, but if this is what I
understand it to be (the ability to get a partial repository from
upstream and work normally from there with the result of data-mineing
tools sometimes reporting 'that's part of the truncated history' if
they hit the cutoff) consider my hand raised.

+1

What does that plus one mean?  I do not know where people picked
up this annoying plus or minus one business, but could you all
stop that?

If you are volunteering to help debugging and feeding bugfixes
that is very much welcome and appreciated.

Thanks.

On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 18:54 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

"Horst H. von Brand" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

David Lang [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 7 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

[pu]

 Johannes's shallow clone work now should rebase cleanly on top
 of 'master' although I haven't done so yet.  As he said
 himself the series is waiting for people who have needs for
 such a feature to raise hands.

I haven't been watching this recently, but if this is what I
understand it to be (the ability to get a partial repository from
upstream and work normally from there with the result of data-mineing
tools sometimes reporting 'that's part of the truncated history' if
they hit the cutoff) consider my hand raised.

+1

What does that plus one mean?  I do not know where people picked
up this annoying plus or minus one business, but could you all
stop that?

Horst can speak for himself, but I'd wager he's using the Apache voting
conventions: