IRCloggy #git 2019-01-19

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→ Channels Documentation

Provider of IRC logs since 2005.
WARNING: As Freenode became unjoinable and lost all warnings in topics, we cannot log channels on Freenode anymore.

2019-01-19

← ngui left00:00
← sanscoeu_ left00:00
→ mat001 joined00:01
← jottr_ left00:01
thejunkjon I ended up solving my issue by downgrading to 2.19.2 instead of 2.2100:01
→ jottr_ joined00:02
thejunkjon with the git-remote-https taking a lot of CPU.. still confused on the reason though :(00:02
← finalbeta left00:03
→ atrigent joined00:06
\void → WTFFREENODE564F400:08
WTFFREENODE564F4 → \void00:08
← mikecmpbll left00:10
→ ngui joined00:10
\void → \0x766F696400:10
← dege left00:18
← leeN left00:22
→ sQVe joined00:27
→ thiago joined00:30
← sQVe left00:33
→ Envil joined00:34
codebam during an interactive rebase how can I drop to a shell to be able to git reset a file I commit so that it doesn't get added to the commit?00:41
I just want to remove my Session.vim that I accidentally added in my first commit00:42
GreenJello codebam, 'e'00:43
→ p0s1x joined00:43
← p0s1x left00:44
codebam GreenJello: but if it's the first commit how can I amend it to remove that file?00:44
because I can't reset the first commit00:44
mud 'e' should work fine on the first commit00:44
codebam it does, but the commit is there to be amended00:45
how do I remove the file from the commit00:45
BtbN remote it and amend00:45
*v00:45
codebam but you can't remove the first commit?00:46
BtbN the file...00:46
rewt doesn't `git status` give instructions?00:47
codebam oh, right00:47
sorry, thank you BtbN00:47
or well... I don't actually want to remove the file00:48
like I just don't want it to be staged00:48
I gitignored it00:48
(in a later commit)00:48
rewt try `git status` ... it should tell you how to do that00:48
mud codebam: git rm --cached00:48
rewt something like git rm --cached <file>00:49
codebam oh okay, thank you00:49
← acebrianjuan left00:49
BtbN you can also just make a commit that removes it, and fixup it into the initial commit00:49
codebam oh true yeah. that worked though thank you all very much! :)00:51
→ fstd_ joined00:51
← atrigent left00:52
← fstd left00:55
fstd_ → fstd00:55
← diogenese left00:55
codebam how would I do a rebase so that all commits in the rebase get pgp signed?00:55
← klotzhauer left00:55
codebam `git rebase --root -S` doesn't seem to work00:56
→ diogenese joined00:56
← Phylock left00:59
codebam `git rebase -S --force-rebase --root` seemed to work01:00
→ remcycles joined01:02
→ horribleprogram joined01:04
← freeman42x left01:05
→ dreiss joined01:06
→ mikecmpbll joined01:08
← Regon left01:08
← paraxial left01:10
→ paraxial joined01:10
← sgn left01:12
→ macaronus joined01:15
→ atrigent joined01:16
← \0x766F6964 left01:21
← Silmarilion left01:23
← Sasazuka left01:25
← mat001 left01:25
← orbyt_ left01:27
→ mat001 joined01:27
← remcycles left01:27
→ henriquev joined01:29
← DanDare left01:29
→ courrier joined01:31
← courrier left01:34
→ courrier joined01:34
→ AfroThundr|main joined01:35
→ kerframil joined01:36
→ sgn joined01:36
→ RoriconKnight joined01:42
← pR0Ps left01:53
→ zq__ joined01:53
zq__ possible for git log to display files that were deleted in a commit?01:53
← alyptik left01:54
← dfee left01:55
→ pR0Ps joined01:56
← courrier left01:59
zq__ normally, i'd use whatchanged, but the documentation claims that it's deprecated01:59
← hbautista left02:00
← mat001 left02:01
zq__ ah, --name-status02:05
thanks!02:05
← zq__ left02:05
→ dfee joined02:06
← F0rTex left02:12
→ F0rTex joined02:13
→ cdown joined02:14
→ finalbeta joined02:14
← GreenJello left02:14
← dreiss left02:15
→ GreenJello joined02:16
→ dreiss joined02:16
← m0viefreak left02:19
→ igemnace joined02:20
← RoriconKnight left02:20
← xcm left02:21
→ xcm joined02:22
← Essadon left02:28
→ prakashdanish joined02:30
→ alyptik joined02:33
→ robertparkerx joined02:42
robertparkerx if git is out of sync and there are changes locally, is this an okay routine - https://hastebin.com/icoqakudeg.sql02:42
← dreiss left02:43
→ libertyprime joined02:43
→ kadoban joined02:50
← codebam left02:50
→ n3wborn joined02:50
← cdown left02:51
← dfee left02:51
→ mobile_c joined02:52
→ novum joined02:52
→ dfee joined02:58
→ cdown joined02:59
→ irc_viewer_test joined02:59
← AfroThundr|main left03:03
→ AfroThundr|main joined03:07
igemnace robertparkerx: yes, but your git stash apply might result in conflicts you have to manually resolve03:09
← alyptik left03:09
robertparkerx I was trying to prevent that03:09
← irc_viewer_test left03:12
igemnace yes, that routine does its best to prevent that. but since you're pulling, there's still a chance for the new pulled work to conflict with your local work, if they both introduce incompatible changes to the same files03:13
why is resolving conflicts a problem? is this in a fully automated environment?03:13
robertparkerx I'm not that good identifying and resolving conflicts yet.03:14
igemnace resolving conflicts isn't a git thing, it's a code thing03:15
← cdown left03:15
kadoban Well, it's a bit of both. Mostly code though03:15
!eek might help03:15
gitinfo [!eekaconflict] Merge conflicts are a natural part of collaboration. When facing one, *don't panic*. Read "How to resolve conflicts" in man git-merge and http://git-scm.com/book/ch3-2.html#Basic-Merge-Conflicts then carefully go through the conflicts. Picking one side verbatim is not always the right choice! A nice video explaining merge conflicts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz7NuSCH6II03:15
igemnace go ahead, run those commands. if they run smoothly, great03:16
if not, we can talk about resolving merge conflicts03:16
← ketas left03:20
← prakashdanish left03:23
→ irc_viewer_test joined03:26
→ cdown joined03:27
← Envil left03:30
← irc_viewer_test left03:30
← n3wborn left03:31
→ Goplat joined03:33
→ orbyt_ joined03:35
← henriquev left03:37
→ ozcanesen joined03:38
→ dreiss joined03:39
← Bobdude left03:48
lagothrix → Guest7789203:49
→ lagothrix joined03:49
← Dirak left03:50
← dreiss left03:51
← Guest77892 left03:52
→ ketas joined04:00
← ngui left04:05
→ ngui joined04:06
→ prakashdanish joined04:06
→ alyptik joined04:07
→ dreiss joined04:08
← kadoban left04:09
← MACscr left04:10
← ngui left04:10
→ ngui joined04:10
→ YuGiOhJCJ joined04:10
← TheRuckus left04:11
→ TheRuckus joined04:13
← igemnace left04:16
← dreiss left04:18
robertparkerx I watched the video about Merge Conflicts. Can this get lengthy if there are alot of conflicts?04:27
→ codebam joined04:27
← horribleprogram left04:33
GreenJello robertparkerx, yes, but even more so if you use a rebase workflow04:33
it's the least satisfying use of time, but still requires you to be very careful04:34
→ igemnace joined04:36
← waveclaw left04:44
← ngui left04:50
→ ngui joined04:51
← foul_owl left04:52
← snowgoggles left04:53
→ Cabanoss- joined04:53
← Cabanossi left04:55
← TJ- left04:56
→ supernov1h joined04:56
→ \void joined05:00
→ mat001 joined05:02
→ pks_ joined05:02
→ dreiss joined05:03
→ sauvin joined05:03
← pks left05:03
pks_ → pks05:03
→ foul_owl joined05:05
← ngui left05:05
→ ngui joined05:05
← mat001 left05:06
← YuGiOhJCJ left05:09
→ waveclaw joined05:12
← Arcaelyx left05:14
← codebam left05:20
→ ferdna joined05:23
→ rnmhdn joined05:26
→ inkbottle joined05:31
← ngui left05:35
→ ngui joined05:36
← ngui left05:40
→ ngui joined05:40
← orbyt_ left05:47
← prakashdanish left05:47
← boombatower left05:51
← Spacew00t left05:53
← sjoshi left05:54
→ rsrx joined06:00
← cdown left06:06
← Toadisattva left06:08
→ prakashdanish joined06:09
← netj left06:10
→ netj joined06:11
← prakashdanish left06:14
→ thebope joined06:15
← igemnace left06:16
→ MonoGreyMatter joined06:16
← rnmhdn left06:20
← ngui left06:35
→ ngui joined06:36
→ mat001 joined06:43
← Raed left06:45
← thebope left06:47
← ngui left06:47
→ ngui joined06:48
→ nowhere_man joined06:49
→ fieldmapper joined06:50
← mat001 left06:51
→ mat001 joined06:53
← Trieste left06:54
← ozcanesen left06:54
→ prakashdanish joined06:55
→ Trieste joined06:56
← alyptik left06:56
← jnewt left06:56
← ferdna left07:05
→ Raed joined07:06
→ stitched_unicorn joined07:06
→ cfoch joined07:09
→ mmkumr joined07:09
→ aw1 joined07:14
← netj left07:15
→ netj joined07:15
→ rick8024 joined07:15
← KnoP left07:18
rick8024 → KnoP07:18
mmkumr I am modifying a file in git source code for testing that single file. I have to run `make` and `make install` for the project every time. So, is there any way by with I can test that single file without running `make` amd `make install`07:18
← thiago left07:19
← rsrx left07:24
parsnip mmkumr: not sure that's a git question. what language is it?07:26
mmkumr parsnip: Actually I am modifying git-merge-one-file.sh07:29
sorry I have entered wrong command07:32
← mmkumr left07:32
→ czart joined07:34
→ ozcanesen joined07:36
→ nimbleark joined07:39
→ sjoshi joined07:41
→ Envil joined07:43
← ngui left07:49
→ ngui joined07:49
← ngui left07:51
→ ngui joined07:51
← Goplat left07:53
← \void left07:57
→ apoos_maximus joined07:58
← victorqueiroz left08:00
← kerframil left08:05
← al-damiri left08:06
→ Phylock joined08:09
→ Dirak joined08:12
→ kerframil joined08:12
→ cswl joined08:13
← cur8or left08:13
← GreenJello left08:16
← dreiss left08:21
← prakashdanish left08:25
← sgn left08:26
→ alyptik joined08:29
← apoos_maximus left08:33
→ Noti joined08:34
→ pfleck joined08:37
→ estodiMania joined08:38
← mat001 left08:39
← estodiMania left08:39
← stitched_unicorn left08:45
← vavkamil left08:46
→ rsrx joined08:47
← MonoGreyMatter left08:49
→ prakashdanish joined08:50
→ irqq joined08:50
→ Fernando-Basso joined08:53
← thejunkjon left09:00
← q6AA4FD left09:01
→ GreenJello joined09:01
cluelessperson_ → cluelessperson09:01
→ Toxtlo joined09:02
← Noti left09:07
← nowhere_man left09:09
Toxtlo Hi, I got a develop branch and issued a git merge master command. No conflicts found. Now it says I got a detached head. I just wanted to merge all master changes back into it, can anybody help?09:09
up|ime can you paste the output of "git status"?09:09
← GreenJello left09:10
Toxtlo its german, so I try to translate: HEAD detatched at origin/develop nothing to commit, working dir unchanged09:11
← Dirak left09:11
Toxtlo thats what strange, because the merge command listed all the files it changed09:12
git log still showing the HEAD of origin/develop ...09:13
→ Noti joined09:14
← dpyro left09:20
→ GreenJello joined09:23
← GreenJello left09:24
→ GreenJello joined09:25
aw1 Toxtlo, does "git checkout development" work09:25
Toxtlo yes09:25
aw1 that fixed HEAD .. did it?09:26
→ howdoi joined09:26
Toxtlo I made a new checkout and before merging I already get a detached HEAD message,... it looks like my colleague who created the develop branch for me gave me a detached HEAD branch?09:26
he created it a few days ago and yesterday there were 2 commits in master, so I wanted to check my develop_XY out and merge master into that before working09:27
but it looks like develop already has a detached head...09:28
aw1 I am not sure if it possible to push to remote with a detached HEAD09:28
Toxtlo what I'm basically doing is clone the whole repo, checkout my develop and when entering status I get a detached head message, even before calling merge09:29
when I came here, I thought it was my merge what caused that...09:29
← ozcanesen left09:30
aw1 that is strange09:31
→ Darcidride_ joined09:31
aw1 so your develop branch must also be on remote or else how else could you checkout to it *after* cloning a fresh copy09:32
Toxtlo its on github09:32
aw1 git checkout develop && git log origin/develop ... what does that say?09:32
Toxtlo or what do you mean?09:32
aw1 Toxtlo, your answer "its on github" answered my question. thanks.09:33
Toxtlo ok :-)09:33
aw1 sorry that command should be "git checkout develop && git log ..origin/develop"09:33
Toxtlo checking out sets the HEAD back to the last rev09:34
aw1 which is the expected behaviour09:34
→ ozcanesen joined09:34
Toxtlo and log command gives the correct log09:34
aw1 well by doing a "git log ..origin/develop" i was hoping to see a difference between your local develop branch and remote ... *not* the logs themselves09:35
Toxtlo sha is same as on github09:35
ah ok09:35
mhh, no09:35
← GreenJello left09:37
Toxtlo but when i enter checkout ... and right after that call status, it just tells me that the head is detached....09:37
how is that possible?09:37
maybe "call it broken" ? ^^09:38
← cfoch left09:38
aw1 i am quite puzzled by that to be honest. May be this is above my level of knowledge09:39
Toxtlo ok, but thank you very much for your help :-)09:39
I will contact my collague on monday, maybe he will just delete and make a new one...09:40
aw1 Toxtlo, try replicating the steps inside of docker or another virtual machine to rule out any "local environment" issues09:43
Toxtlo ok, gut a VM for those cases, will do that!09:45
got*09:45
but I thought git would only work on the local folder struct09:45
← Darcidride_ left09:47
aw1 but you will be cloning a fresh copy of the repo .. right? the strange "already in detached HEAD state" effect needs to be diagnosed09:47
inkbottle undo last commit (but not like doing a checkout to the previous commit); no file must be touched in the process; it is not yet clear to me how I should do that09:48
aw1 may be i was not clear. I suspect your git setup might be wonky so please try to work on a fresh machine to check if it is your git settings or not09:48
Toxtlo alright, yes, I always delete the whole folder I cloned09:48
← libertyprime left09:48
aw1 inkbottle, "git reset HEAD~1" will remove the most recent commit *and* retain all the changes you made since HEAD~1. Is that what you want?09:49
Toxtlo huh, it looks like it was a mistake on my side... I wrote git checkout origin/develop instead of develop ....09:49
← rsrx left09:49
inkbottle aw1: yes, probably... I try that and tell you09:50
Toxtlo in germany we would say: give me a hole in the ground to vanish, to embarassed...09:52
→ dreiss joined09:53
Toxtlo but why does that make a difference... git branch -r calls that branch origin/develop ...09:53
he still tells me that HEAD is at the correct sha when doing that... only after calling status it fails...09:55
inkbottle aw1: Yes, what I was looking for, thanks ;)09:57
← ozcanesen left09:57
← im0nde left09:58
→ Zexaron joined09:58
← pfleck left09:59
→ pfleck joined10:00
→ koomen joined10:00
→ Darcidride_ joined10:01
← koomen left10:03
← Fusl left10:05
→ Fusl joined10:06
aw1 Toxtlo, that makes sense. When you git cloned the repo your branch was master ... then doing a git checkout origin/develop would move the HEAD to point to that commit even though your branch won't change10:07
thus you were actually in a detached HEAD state10:07
to fix that you can do "git checkout master" that will move HEAD to point to the tip of the master branch and then you can do the right "git checkout develop" which will create a local branch tracking origin/develop10:08
→ im0nde joined10:12
← hussam left10:13
Toxtlo O.o I should redo the git tuts10:15
I got what you said, but that showed me, that I didn't get everything that is to git :-D10:16
thank you for your help :-)10:17
← catsup left10:17
→ catsup joined10:17
← catsup left10:18
→ catsup joined10:19
→ MonoGreyMatter joined10:20
← pfleck left10:21
← Noti left10:31
← Celmor left10:33
← hofmann3900 left10:37
← Darcidride_ left10:42
→ aw1_ joined10:45
← aw1 left10:47
→ leeN joined10:48
→ Makaveli7 joined10:50
← Makaveli7 left10:51
→ plexigras joined10:51
→ Makaveli7 joined10:55
→ arminhajrovic joined10:56
→ Mike11 joined10:57
← cd left11:02
→ m0viefreak joined11:02
→ AtumT joined11:11
← arminhajrovic left11:12
← naoey left11:12
← dreiss left11:23
→ cur8or joined11:25
→ naoey joined11:25
← atrigent left11:27
→ n3wborn joined11:29
← duderonomy left11:29
→ GreenJello joined11:39
← GreenJello left11:44
← prakashdanish left11:45
→ GreenJello joined11:52
← Zexaron left11:57
← Mike11 left12:04
← czart left12:04
← GreenJello left12:09
→ Darcidride_ joined12:17
→ dudek joined12:17
→ Lyberta joined12:18
Lyberta is something under ./git/objects supposed to change?12:18
osse Lyberta: Files there can come and go, but not change12:20
Maybe the packs can. Not sure.12:21
← jabular left12:23
→ jabular joined12:24
Lyberta osse, hmm, ok, for some reason some files in my backup have different write times but checking hashes proved that they are identical12:24
→ pi- joined12:25
→ blackntan joined12:26
→ m1dnight1 joined12:34
→ lucasb joined12:35
osse Lyberta: Git doesn't care about write times, so those are probably from when the backup was created/ is updated, which of course is later than the originals12:36
← m1dnight_ left12:36
osse Or the clocks might be slightly different for whatever reason12:36
← Spr0cket left12:45
→ Spr0cket joined12:48
← aw1_ left12:53
← gxt left12:55
→ rsrx joined12:57
← brandonkal left13:08
← Darcidride_ left13:09
→ stitched_unicorn joined13:11
→ apoos_maximus joined13:14
← treehug88 left13:15
→ elsheepo joined13:18
← akdev left13:22
← blackntan left13:24
← bn_work left13:24
← elsheepo left13:24
→ victorqueiroz joined13:25
→ akdev joined13:28
→ blackntan joined13:37
← blackntan left13:43
→ blackntan joined13:44
→ cfoch joined13:48
← netj left13:57
→ netj joined13:58
Lyberta osse, ah, maybe, thanks13:58
← geekodour08 left13:58
→ Darcidride_ joined14:00
← irqq left14:00
← Darcidride_ left14:01
← Fernando-Basso left14:02
→ ozcanesen joined14:02
→ geekodour08 joined14:04
← Lyberta left14:06
← geekodour08 left14:06
← stitched_unicorn left14:06
→ geekodour08 joined14:06
← sjoshi left14:08
→ xrexeon joined14:08
→ sjoshi joined14:09
→ GreenJello joined14:09
← xrexeon left14:09
→ xrexeon joined14:10
← xrexeon left14:10
← geekodour08 left14:12
← sjoshi left14:13
→ sjoshi joined14:13
← sjoshi left14:14
→ stitched_unicorn joined14:14
→ sjoshi joined14:15
← ozcanesen left14:15
→ jngk joined14:15
→ jungsubk joined14:15
→ Essadon joined14:16
← Essadon left14:16
→ Essadon joined14:17
← VladGh left14:19
← inkbottle left14:24
→ xrexeon joined14:27
→ YuGiOhJCJ joined14:29
→ acebrianjuan joined14:30
acebrianjuan Hi all14:30
quick question14:30
I made a commit in the master branch14:31
but I shoul've made it into a development branch14:31
How can I apply my last commit to the development branch14:31
?14:32
← osse left14:36
→ mat001 joined14:36
→ osse joined14:36
→ irqq joined14:40
← GreenJello left14:43
_ikke_ git cherry-pick + git reset14:47
← leeN left14:51
← novum left14:52
← jungsubk left14:53
← Phylock left14:53
← mobile_c left14:56
→ Noti joined14:59
→ aexvir joined15:04
→ igemnace joined15:10
← YuGiOhJCJ left15:10
→ YuGiOhJCJ joined15:11
→ czart joined15:11
→ hbautista joined15:11
→ GreenJello joined15:12
← hbautista left15:13
→ CryptoDavid joined15:13
→ wootehfoot joined15:14
→ mobile_c joined15:15
← mobile_c left15:16
← Noti left15:17
→ mobile_c joined15:22
→ inkbottle joined15:23
→ freeman42x joined15:26
→ orbyt_ joined15:27
← GreenJello left15:36
→ raymond joined15:36
← profmac left15:37
→ ozcanesen joined15:37
→ bn_work joined15:39
← Geezus42 left15:43
← ozcanesen left15:44
← inkbottle left15:44
→ Geezus42 joined15:47
→ snfgf joined15:49
← jottr_ left15:50
→ profmac joined15:50
snfgf can i configure a url for a remote in gitconfig15:50
_ikke_ Better to use git remote for that, but yes, you can15:51
snfgf thanks; what would the config look like?15:51
section heading [remote origin]15:51
url = https://user:pass@abc.com15:52
something like that15:52
_ikke_ [remote "origin"]15:52
that url, and you should also provide fetch15:52
+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/fork/*15:52
+refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*15:52
snfgf ^what do those do?15:53
and what option name (eg. url) should i assign them to15:53
_ikke_ fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*15:54
when you run fetch, it tells git to map the branches it received to the correct remote tracking branch namespace :P15:55
snfgf thanks15:56
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*15:56
→ Fernando-Basso joined15:58
→ geekodour08 joined15:58
→ Zexaron joined16:04
← rsrx left16:06
→ dilfridge joined16:08
→ Regon joined16:09
→ phree joined16:13
← igemnace left16:14
→ deltam joined16:16
← victorqueiroz left16:16
← snfgf left16:16
→ dreiss joined16:17
→ korzq joined16:19
← AtumT left16:21
→ AtumT joined16:21
→ igemnace joined16:21
← geekodour08 left16:27
→ Phylock joined16:27
→ geekodour08 joined16:28
← Munt left16:29
→ snfgf joined16:31
snfgf hi; i've specified 'url' in ~/.gitconfig under the heading [remote "origin"], which (as i might have guessed) is disrupting all origins16:32
how do i limit this url to apply only to a specific repository?16:32
_ikke_ By adding it in the .git/gitconfig file of that specific repo16:32
osse snfgf: there is only one origin16:32
ohh16:32
i suppose you can just remove that line16:32
snfgf osse: i need it specified for a single repository16:33
don't need, but it helps16:33
_ikke_ snfgf: why are you doing this manually/16:33
?16:33
snfgf this remote repo prompts for username and password, which i instead put i the url16:33
osse snfgf: usually that's what git clone or git remote add does16:33
snfgf _ikke_: there's a not-manual way?16:34
_ikke_ snfgf: yes, git remote16:34
git remote add origin <url>16:34
or git remote set-url origin <url> if the remote already exists16:34
snfgf okie-doke, will try16:34
→ nowhere_man joined16:36
← orbyt_ left16:38
→ codebam joined16:39
→ thiago joined16:41
← FutureTense left16:41
← korzq left16:43
→ korzq joined16:44
← Essadon left16:47
← xrexeon left16:48
→ novum joined16:49
← korzq left16:49
→ Essadon joined16:49
→ ferdna joined16:50
→ Goplat joined16:50
→ korzq joined16:50
→ Arcaelyx joined16:50
← stitched_unicorn left16:53
← AtumT left16:54
← dreiss left16:55
← korzq left16:56
→ AtumT joined16:56
→ korzq joined16:57
← AtumT left16:58
→ AtumT joined16:59
→ k_sze[work] joined16:59
← Kira left17:01
← korzq left17:02
→ Toadisattva joined17:04
→ korzq joined17:04
← korzq left17:04
← snfgf left17:07
← Fernando-Basso left17:09
→ GreenJello joined17:12
→ fission6 joined17:14
→ courrier joined17:15
→ d10n-work joined17:17
→ _xor joined17:17
← codebam left17:23
→ Kira joined17:26
← igemnace left17:26
← Goplat left17:26
← blackntan left17:27
← Admish left17:27
→ Admish joined17:28
← k_sze[work] left17:29
← apoos_maximus left17:33
→ apoos_maximus joined17:33
→ dreiss joined17:38
← KnoP left17:40
← kjartan left17:43
← n3wborn left17:48
→ kjartan joined17:48
← lucasb left17:53
← kerframil left17:53
← Puffball left17:54
→ orbyt_ joined17:57
← phree left17:59
← novum left18:00
← dreiss left18:01
→ sauercrowd joined18:07
→ dpyro joined18:08
← nuc left18:11
→ blackntan joined18:11
← freeman42x left18:12
← Admish left18:12
← wootehfoot left18:13
→ Admish joined18:15
← GoGi left18:24
← ghost43 left18:24
→ ghost43 joined18:24
← Admish left18:25
→ dreiss joined18:33
← Impaloo left18:33
→ nuc joined18:37
← nuc left18:37
→ nuc joined18:39
→ flippo joined18:41
→ Impaloo joined18:44
← Khisanth left18:45
← mooasaurus left18:51
→ mooasaurus joined18:52
→ codebam joined18:52
→ Dirak joined18:54
→ noobineer joined18:55
→ Khisanth joined18:59
→ atrigent joined18:59
→ xrexeon joined18:59
← xrexeon left19:00
→ xrexeon joined19:00
← Geezus42 left19:01
← albel727 left19:01
→ albel727 joined19:01
→ Geezus42 joined19:03
→ jahhein joined19:03
→ snowgoggles joined19:03
← xrexeon left19:03
→ xrexeon joined19:04
← ngui left19:04
← dreiss left19:05
→ dege joined19:05
→ SerialSmile joined19:06
← czart left19:07
← im0nde left19:08
← jahhein left19:09
← Toadisattva left19:13
→ m1m0 joined19:18
← albel727 left19:21
← mooasaurus left19:27
→ mooasaurus joined19:27
→ dreiss joined19:28
→ lmussio joined19:31
→ albel727 joined19:37
→ AtumT_ joined19:37
← AtumT left19:37
← aexvir left19:38
← jngk left19:40
→ AtumT joined19:42
← dreiss left19:43
← AtumT_ left19:45
← noobineer left19:45
← SerialSmile left19:47
← albel727 left19:48
→ albel727 joined19:49
← greatgatsby left19:49
→ ghormoon joined19:49
→ AtumT_ joined19:50
← codebam left19:51
← AtumT left19:52
← mooasaurus left19:53
→ toothe_ joined19:54
← toothe left19:54
← xcm left19:55
→ xcm joined19:58
← apoos_maximus left19:58
→ Puffball joined20:01
← lmussio left20:03
→ mooasaurus joined20:04
← atrigent left20:05
→ mizu_no_oto joined20:05
→ codebam joined20:07
→ noobineer joined20:07
← mizu_no_oto left20:11
← xcm left20:13
← geekodour08 left20:13
→ xcm joined20:14
→ mizu_no_oto joined20:15
→ geekodour08 joined20:16
→ MrAureliusR joined20:20
MrAureliusR so I've made a bunch of changes, which are not staged yet. I realized I should probably make these changes on a new branch. Is there a way to do this without stashing the changes, checking out a new branch, and applying the changes? or is that the best way to handle this? I come upon this situation all the time, and figure there's probably a better way to do it20:21
→ duderonomy joined20:22
→ m1mo joined20:22
← m1m0 left20:23
cluelessperson How do you merge a branch to master?20:24
I'm done with coding on that branch20:24
thiago MrAureliusR: !float20:24
gitinfo MrAureliusR: If you have made a change in your working directory and have NOT YET COMMITTED, you may "float" that change over to another (`git checkout oldbranch`) or new (`git checkout -b newbranch`) branch and commit it there. If the files you changed differ between branches, the checkout will fail. In that case, `git stash` then checkout, and `git stash apply` and go through normal conflict resolution.20:24
GreenJello cluelessperson, normally you have to switch to master, and then merge your branch20:24
MrAureliusR oh wow. that's neat, I didn't know the changes would come with20:25
does it matter if they've been staged or not?20:25
and will floating unstage them on master?20:25
GreenJello cluelessperson, if you use a service like github, you can use their pull request feature to track and merge batches of changes20:25
thiago no, staging doesn't matter and they should retain that state20:25
MrAureliusR awesome, thansk thiago20:25
thiago what's important is that the files you modified be identical in the source and destination branch20:26
MrAureliusR well, if it's a new branch based off the previous commit, that shouldn't matter20:26
thiago indeed20:26
cluelessperson GreenJello: ah, that was it, I was on the branch.20:26
thiago you can also make a commit in the previous branch, *then* create the new branch20:26
and back one commit out in the original branch (git reset --hard @~)20:27
cluelessperson GreenJello: I feel like this tool (or git) should just friendly allow you to select current branch into master20:27
the naming conventions also seem a little unintuitive.20:27
and cli ux20:27
sane: git create branch <name>, git create tag <name>, git create commit <message>20:28
lupine well, it grew, rather than being designed20:29
MrAureliusR I dunno, I like it the way it is20:29
that way each of those things is its own command20:29
instead of all being under "create"20:29
cluelessperson the terms "tag" "rebase" "clone" "fetch" "pull" are all ...20:30
similar enough they're confusing20:30
MrAureliusR are they tho20:30
cluelessperson basically, it forces new people to literally lookup and memorize the terms, rather than being obvious20:30
MrAureliusR I don't find them confusing at all20:31
they're rather self-descriptive20:31
cluelessperson I mean, fetch, pull, clone20:31
thiago verbs in the imperative: tag, branch, commit20:31
MrAureliusR and very few people sit down at a command line with git and just start guessing20:31
thiago indeed fetch, pull and clone are confusing20:31
MrAureliusR most people follow a tutorial20:31
thiago you have to learn the difference for those20:31
cluelessperson yeah, what I'm saying is that with proper naming, you don't have to "learn the different"20:32
MrAureliusR but it's like any software that has its own terms, it's just part of the learning curve20:32
cluelessperson the name would communicate the difference.20:32
thiago but for those of us who've been using git for 12+ years, a change would not be welcome20:32
MrAureliusR how so?20:32
anyway I have to get back to work20:33
← MrAureliusR left20:33
cluelessperson pull could be "sync down", clone could be "download"20:33
and how is fetch different from clone?20:34
eh, clone is a good term20:34
→ novum joined20:34
cluelessperson I'll put more thought into ideas. :P20:34
_ikke_ pull is more than just sync20:35
_ikke_ set mode: -o20:35
_ikke_ fetch is download20:35
clone is initialize + fetch20:35
osse the problem is that by the time you know git thoroughly and truly are in a position to suggest good alternative names you just don't care anymore20:36
_ikke_ pull is fetch + (merge or rebase)20:36
cluelessperson osse: yes, but a learning curve actively makes the tool less common and more difficult to use.20:36
← d10n-work left20:36
cluelessperson there's a cost to committing to learning new things.20:36
learning new things is good, but people have to manage their resources.20:37
if git appears to be difficult/confusing20:37
many will just give up.20:37
osse well it's not like anyone will lose any money over it :p20:37
cluelessperson osse: actually, if people avoid using this productivity tool due to confusion or fear, it costs money and productivity, and organization, and etc.20:38
_ikke_ cluelessperson: How would craftsmen deal with this?20:38
A lot of their tools require skill and training20:38
and are even physically dangerous if not operated properly20:39
cluelessperson you don't have to force people to use git well20:39
but tools inherently should be easy to understand to operate.20:39
_ikke_ No one is forcing people to use git20:39
cluelessperson if git were easier to introduce high schoolers to, i'd demand they'd all learn it. :P20:39
→ Fernando-Basso joined20:40
cluelessperson version control is so useful20:40
_ikke_ cluelessperson: I tend to compare these things as the difference between playmobile and lego20:41
HedgeMage cluelessperson: I used RCS, CVS, and SVN in high school... all of which are harder to learn and more error prone.20:41
→ aexvir joined20:41
_ikke_ playmobile is simpler, but also a lot less flexible20:41
lego is more complex, you have to actually build things, but as a consequence, you can do a lot more with it20:42
← aexvir left20:42
cluelessperson HedgeMage: I think you're missing the point. :P20:42
Things can be complex, but organized and intuitive.20:42
HedgeMage cluelessperson: git is well within the reach of high school students. Anyone who wants to learn programming should learn the grown-up tools. I can tell you as someone who's worked with a LOT of junior devs...the ones who learned on the kiddie tools do not self-teach and advance their careers in the first several years nearly as well as those who were presented with "these are the professional tools, they take20:43
→ overbythere joined20:43
HedgeMage effort to learn, but make you better at your craft"20:43
cluelessperson I suppose just suggesting it isn't very helpful though.20:43
_ikke_ cluelessperson: No one of use is denying that the interface is simple20:43
sorry20:43
is denying the interface isn't simple20:43
bremner it seems a bit like complaining about the illogic of english grammar. You're correct, but it's lost battle.20:43
cluelessperson _ikke_: I believe I can make it simple. :)20:44
I just can't force git uses my ideas. ;)20:44
_ikke_ A lot of people tried to make it simple20:44
but they also often tend to just get rid of features by doing that20:44
One thing that is deemed difficult is the index/staging area20:44
It's one of the first things that get dropped20:45
HedgeMage cluelessperson: Nothing is an efficient power tool AND a learning platform. Pick one.20:45
_ikke_ The consequence is that people thing much less about what they are going to commit20:45
cluelessperson _ikke_: staging area?20:46
← foul_owl left20:46
cluelessperson like, add, rm and such?20:46
_ikke_ yes20:46
cluelessperson That's because it's not visualized well.20:46
"visualized well" isn't a good way to describe it.20:47
← xcm left20:47
← waveclaw left20:47
cluelessperson When I started using git years ago, I found it confusing because people simply didn't describe that there *was* a staging area.20:47
→ xcm joined20:47
cluelessperson and git doesn't make it obvious20:47
without knowing what to do/look for.20:48
cluelessperson ponders.20:48
_ikke_ https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-Git-Basics20:48
→ waveclaw joined20:48
_ikke_ even the v1 book which is quite old already shows that https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-Git-Basics20:48
b0nn cluelessperson: yeah I had that same experience when I started20:49
cluelessperson I remember trying to do git commit <file> and being confused.20:49
b0nn _ikke_: it's no good citing a book, when most people don't know about it when they first encounter git20:49
cluelessperson _ikke_: I don't mean to fault the tool. You're right that it seems to be built up over time rather than designed outright.20:50
b0nn it's not like you install git, and wham there's a copy of the bnook supplied as well20:50
_ikke_ cluelessperson: that's exactly the case20:50
cluelessperson it certainly is the type of thing that has to be built organically based on needs, rather than the rabid visionings without context.20:50
_ikke_ b0nn: git isn't a tool built by a company that has a marketing depertment behind it to promote it and to make it apealing to the masses20:51
b0nn so, that somehow makes people less confused when they first use it?20:51
_ikke_ It's a tool created by power users for power users20:51
cluelessperson _ikke_: you're right, but here's what I want to make for the world.20:52
b0nn When I first encountered git (in a professional context) Iit was mandated that I use it, but nobody in the company knew how to use it properly20:52
cluelessperson People have limited mental faculties and resources. Time, energy, intelligence.20:52
Cumulatively, all the tools together can be hard to manage and learn or pick up well.20:52
now, it's easy for *me* some random asshole to come in after the fact and be like, "I have ideas"20:53
b0nn In fact there's an XKCD cartoon that sums up precisely how people understand git https://xkcd.com/1597/20:53
_ikke_ b0nn: In my feeling that's how people treat lots of the tooling they use20:54
b0nn So, the discussion here is about making that less so for git20:54
And you cannot start on that task, unless you accept that there is an issue20:54
cluelessperson ponders20:55
→ sourcream joined20:55
_ikke_ b0nn: like I said, few people are denying that git is easy/simple20:55
b0nn my feeling is the opposite, *every* time this discussion comes up, people claiming to be experts shout it down20:56
_ikke_ b0nn: I think the discussion is rather about: should git be made simpler to use20:56
b0nn clearer communications is the way to make it easier to use20:57
easier != simpler20:57
_ikke_ And git has improved a lot in that regard20:57
b0nn not in my experience20:57
_ikke_ b0nn: I've seen a lot of improvements in the last 10 years20:57
b0nn of course, I've only been around git for ~8 years20:57
← Toxtlo left20:58
_ikke_ b0nn: the issue is, people want basically an overhaul of git, while the main developers of git are much more following an itterative approach, while still building new features20:58
b0nn no.20:59
Clear communication of what is going on20:59
_ikke_ b0nn: can you give an example?20:59
← xcm left20:59
b0nn Not right now, no20:59
I mean, there was only an example given not more than 5 minutes ago...21:00
→ xcm joined21:00
← fission6 left21:02
→ quipa joined21:02
→ foul_owl joined21:02
→ manuelschneid3r joined21:03
cluelessperson b0nn: _ikke_ those are interesting thoughts. I think git functions well, but that the communication alone needs to be improved.21:07
I just made a mockup --help to list things out kinda how I think people might interpret them better21:07
→ atrigent joined21:11
← alyptik left21:11
_ikke_ I think there was someone else who offered to improve that, but that didn't come through yet21:12
← lupine left21:19
→ Toadisattva joined21:19
← mobile_c left21:21
→ mobile_c joined21:21
← codebam left21:26
← Trieste left21:27
← Dirak left21:27
→ codebam joined21:28
→ Trieste joined21:32
→ AtumT joined21:36
→ sanscoeur joined21:37
← AtumT_ left21:37
← sourcream left21:39
→ n3wborn joined21:42
skered I'm thinking this is a issue with git bash tab completion however would you expect the follow 'git co $branch -- p<tab>' to tab complete files in the branch $branch that start with p?21:42
→ AtumT_ joined21:43
← AtumT left21:43
skered My current goal is to get a file from a different branch and put it in the current tree. 'git co $branch -- path/to/file' is my current soultion.21:45
→ lupine joined21:46
→ Dirak joined21:54
← kjartan left21:56
→ dre_ joined22:01
→ kjartan joined22:01
→ rawtaz joined22:02
rawtaz hullo. is there any way to git push the current branch to a remote (origin in this case) and have git create the remote branch with the same name as the branch you are currently on locally, without having to fiddle with push.default?22:03
that is, i just want to do be on branch foo locally and puch to origin where foo does not exist, and do that with e.g. `git push -u origin` whereby git should create and push to the remote branch "foo"22:04
i dont want to set this to standard behavior (for safety reasons), but i'd like to not have to copy/write out the branch name at times22:04
← cswl left22:05
rawtaz hm maybe `git push origin HEAD`22:06
_ikke_ yes, that's what I use22:06
rawtaz yeah! awesome! :D22:06
← Regon left22:07
→ Regon joined22:08
→ dege_ joined22:08
← styler2go left22:09
→ hofmann3900 joined22:11
← dege left22:11
→ aexvir joined22:11
→ styler2go joined22:12
← plexigras left22:13
← mizu_no_oto left22:14
← rawtaz left22:16
← shentino left22:20
→ alyptik joined22:21
← manuelschneid3r left22:23
→ staafl joined22:26
veegee_ → veegee22:26
→ pfleck joined22:30
j416 I'm disappointed that 'git push origin @' doesn't work22:34
not sure why22:34
← acebrianjuan left22:34
→ freeman42x joined22:35
← TheRuckus left22:38
→ TheRuckus joined22:38
→ horribleprogram joined22:39
← dudek left22:42
→ shentino joined22:47
← aexvir left22:48
osse not sure why you're disappointed ?22:51
← dre_ left22:52
← shentino left22:52
→ peacememories joined22:52
_ikke_ You'd expect @ to work if HEAD works when @ is an alias for EHAD22:52
HEAD*22:52
← TheRuckus left22:53
→ \void joined22:53
← MonoGreyMatter left22:58
→ shentino joined22:59
→ stitched_unicorn joined23:01
← stitched_unicorn left23:01
→ shentino_ joined23:03
← shentino left23:04
→ shentino joined23:08
→ mloskot joined23:09
← shentino_ left23:09
← cluelessperson left23:10
← Dirak left23:12
→ Dirak joined23:13
← AtumT_ left23:16
→ cd joined23:18
← codebam left23:19
← peacememories left23:20
osse agreed23:22
→ adamus1red joined23:23
→ Goplat joined23:24
← yn left23:25
← orbyt_ left23:26
→ yn_ joined23:27
← overbythere left23:30
← CryptoDavid left23:31
← Regon left23:34
← mikecmpbll left23:35
← irqq left23:36
→ sourcream joined23:37
← Fernando-Basso left23:42
toothe_ → toothe23:48
← dege_ left23:50
→ orbyt_ joined23:51
← pfleck left23:52
→ TheRuckus joined23:56
← n3wborn left23:57
yn_ → yn23:58

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→ Channels Documentation