IRCloggy #git 2019-01-26

Provider of IRC logs since 2005.

WARNING: As Freenode became unjoinable and lost all warnings in topics, we cannot log channels on Freenode anymore.

	2019-01-26
	← dege left	00:00
	← akushner left	00:00
	→ Mattiaslndstrm joined	00:02
	← finalbeta left	00:03
	← Revan- left	00:07
	→ dpyro joined	00:07
	→ Revan- joined	00:09
	→ elkalamar joined	00:09
	← elkalamar left	00:09
	→ blood joined	00:13
blood	I'm trying to apply a git patch and I keep having issues with `git apply` messing with line endings. I have set core.autocrlf to false yet its still changing LF -> CRLF when i use whitespace=fix	00:14
	The patch files only contains LF endings but I'm applying the patch on a windows workstation	00:14
	if i pass --ignore-space-change and --whitespace=fix it applies but with warnings	00:15
	Any idea on how I can fix the patch or have it apply cleanly without any issues?	00:15
	→ iam730 joined	00:15
	→ akushner joined	00:15
	← iam730 left	00:16
	← folkrav left	00:16
	→ kyan joined	00:17
	→ andyhuzhill joined	00:19
	← PettanShoutaKun left	00:20
	← basteh left	00:21
j416	blood: what do you have and what do you want?	00:22
	← kyan left	00:22
blood	I don't want the line endings to be messed with	00:23
	→ iam730 joined	00:23
blood	and I want to fix all whitespace warnings	00:23
	I just want to apply the patch cleanly with 0 warnings/errors	00:24
j416	what did you set core.whitespace to?	00:24
	← meLon left	00:25
blood	I didn't touch it	00:25
	so whatever default is	00:25
	if I pass --whitespace=fix, it ends up changing some line endings to CRLF	00:26
j416	blood: what does "git config --get core.whitespace" say?	00:29
	← iam730 left	00:29
blood	nothing. I checked my .gitconfig and its not in the file	00:30
j416	did you run that command in your repo?	00:31
blood	oh where i generated the patch?	00:31
j416	the repo where you're trying to apply it	00:31
blood	oh im not applying it to a repo, im just applying it to a folder	00:32
j416	outside of git?	00:32
	I mean, that's not in a git repo?	00:32
blood	the folder isnt a git repo but im applying it with git bash	00:32
	→ sauercrowd joined	00:32
	→ Seiya415 joined	00:33
j416	I see.	00:33
	← \void left	00:34
	→ nurdie joined	00:35
j416	with core.whitespace unset on *nix, --whitespace=fix to git apply should convert crlf to lf. I wonder if it's the other way round on windows.	00:35
	→ iam730 joined	00:36
	← iam730 left	00:36
j416	at least that's what it does here (macos)	00:37
	← dpyro left	00:38
	→ dpyro joined	00:39
blood	yea it converts LF to CRLF	00:39
	however I'm not even sure why it complains about these line endings during git apply	00:39
	← nurdie left	00:40
blood	ah i think i see the pattern...	00:40
	whenever the patch applies to a file that has LF endings, it will complain about the inserts since they are in LF not CRLF	00:41
	however if the file being patched is in CRLF format, it applies fine	00:41
j416	are you saying it tries to match the target file?	00:41
	← orbyt_ left	00:42
blood	if the target file has LF endings, it complains because it wants to apply the new lines with CRLF endings	00:42
	however if the target file has CRLF, it doesn't complain	00:42
	basically the vanilla folder contains a mixture of files that either contain all LF or all CRLF endings	00:43
	→ thiago joined	00:43
blood	let me try ignoring whitespace too	00:43
	so if i pass --ignore-whitespace, it still causes line endings to be CRLF in files that are all LF	00:45
j416	experimented a bit, didn't get much wiser.	00:45
	why do you use mixed line endings anyway?	00:45
	← Seiya415 left	00:46
blood	I don't, oracle delivers the files like this. They have developers on both win/nix	00:46
j416	...	00:46
	can't you convert them all to something sane?	00:46
blood	sure but the same issue would happen	00:47
	if i convert everything to CRLF, wont *nix users have the same issue?	00:47
	← Makaveli7 left	00:48
blood	I'll just ignore everything and call it a day	00:49
	thanks for the help!	00:50
	→ nurdie joined	00:56
	← manuelschneid3r left	00:56
	← Regon left	01:00
	← nurdie left	01:00
	← z8z left	01:00
	→ iam730 joined	01:01
	← iam730 left	01:01
	← jubal_ left	01:04
	→ xrexeon joined	01:06
	← xrexeon left	01:06
	→ xrexeon joined	01:07
	→ hofmann3900 joined	01:07
	← sauercrowd left	01:07
	← xrexeon left	01:09
	→ xrexeon joined	01:10
	→ iam730 joined	01:10
	← iam730 left	01:10
	→ sauercrowd joined	01:12
	→ jubal joined	01:14
	→ iam730 joined	01:15
	→ horribleprogram joined	01:15
	← akushner left	01:16
	→ qgTG joined	01:18
	← iam730 left	01:18
	← Cabanossi left	01:20
	→ Cabanossi joined	01:20
	← Sasazuka left	01:21
	→ fran__ joined	01:23
	← blood left	01:24
	← jubal left	01:26
	← fran__ left	01:27
	→ jubal joined	01:28
	← mat001 left	01:29
	← g2anj left	01:31
	→ orbyt_ joined	01:34
	← sauercrowd left	01:35
	→ g2anj joined	01:36
	← durham left	01:38
	← jubal left	01:38
	→ fran__ joined	01:39
	← cdown left	01:40
	← fran__ left	01:43
	→ Goplat joined	01:45
	← xrexeon left	01:47
	← Essadon left	01:49
	→ jubal joined	01:59
	→ rick8024 joined	02:00
	← KnoP left	02:01
	rick8024 → KnoP	02:01
	← AfroThundr\|main left	02:03
	← Spacew00t left	02:08
	→ cdown joined	02:11
	← revoltingPeasant left	02:12
	← downer06 left	02:14
	→ downer06 joined	02:15
	← horribleprogram left	02:21
	→ finalbeta joined	02:23
	← causasui left	02:25
	← zulutango left	02:26
	← jubal left	02:27
	→ jubal_ joined	02:27
	→ n3wborn joined	02:32
	← Lunatrius left	02:33
	→ Lunatrius joined	02:33
	→ zulutango joined	02:41
	← mikecmpbll left	02:42
	← freeman42x left	02:47
	← zulutango left	02:47
	→ pi- joined	02:50
pi-	I merged in a PR to master from the GitHub web page. Then straight away on my local machine I `git checkout master; git pull` and it makes a "merge commit" taking me to a vim(?) page.	02:52
	I don't think I've seen that vim page before.	02:52
	Shouldn't it just update master silently?	02:53
	→ z8z joined	02:53
	→ zulutango joined	02:53
	→ fran__ joined	02:54
	← z8z left	02:54
	← duderonomy left	02:54
	→ z8z joined	02:54
kadoban	pi-: Depends. Try aborting what I assume is a merge and doing 'git fetch' and then 'gitk --all' , see what it looks like?	02:54
pi-	https://paste.pound-python.org/show/1yv1MJa9RRbPROMXZlgu/	02:55
kadoban	If you expect a fast-forward, 'git pull --ff-only' is useful	02:55
pi-	^ that's my git log	02:55
	Maybe I should re-clone the repo?	02:55
	→ rkazak joined	02:55
	← z8z left	02:55
kadoban	Recloning is possible I guess. But usually that would only happen if you actually have some local commits (possibly containing work you care about but forgot?) that that would discard.	02:56
	(It's also kind of a bad way to learn, though if you're in a hurry, screw it, do what ya gotta do)	02:56
	→ z8z joined	02:56
pi-	Actually I would like to figure out what's going on here. Usually I am in a hurry. But if I add up the hours of lost productivity over the last year from not using tools right .. meh not pretty.	02:57
	But if I `git diff prev_hash curr_hash` I get nothing!	02:57
kadoban	Looking at the actual shape of history is probably more useful than anything in these kinds of cases	02:57
	gitk --all or !lol	02:57
gitinfo	A nifty view of branches, tags, and other refs: git log --oneline --graph --decorate --all	02:57
Hello71	>vim page	02:57
	damn kids	02:58
kadoban	pi-: By the way, if you don't use vim, you should switch to a different editor. Either set the $EDITOR environment variable, or configure git to use whatever else you like.	02:58
	← veegee left	02:58
	← fran__ left	02:59
	← MACscr left	02:59
	← zulutango left	02:59
pi-	https://paste.pound-python.org/show/tTyyx88nL974aLHg7TTp/	03:00
	← F0rTex left	03:00
pi-	I would like to set it to Sublime Text	03:00
	I'll try that now.	03:01
	→ F0rTex joined	03:01
kadoban	pi-: That's odd. You didn't do 'git pull --no-ff' or have some weird config set, right? You were on 4dc6253 on local master when you merged?	03:02
	Oh wait, maybe I can't read. Let me look again	03:02
	pi-: So it looks like on your local master you had ~3 commits that origin/master didn't have. 97ded34 bd75e37 and 85e4b6d. Is that possible?	03:03
	So if you have extra commits, and origin/master has extra commits, then yeah a merge is required if you just tell it to pull.	03:03
	What did you want to happen instead? (let me know if I misinterpreted, I don't look at the output of that command much to be honest, I usually use gitk)	03:04
	← thomasross left	03:05
	→ thomasross joined	03:05
	← thomasross left	03:07
	→ thomasross_ joined	03:07
	thomasross_ → thomasross	03:07
pi-	So yesterday when I was working I started on clean master (hopefully I started the day with `git pull`). I made a bunch of code changes. I then separated them out into those 3 commits. I then did `git checkout -b foobranch` & went to the website & created + squash-merged-in the PR.	03:08
	Then I `git checkout master; git pull` on my local machine.	03:08
kadoban	pi-: So when you did 'git checkout -b foobranch' I think what happened is, okay you made a branch with those 3 commits on it, but master still has them too	03:09
	So master and foobranch were probably equal at that point	03:09
pi-	Maybe I'm only getting this extra empty commit because I did things in the wrong order? Maybe I should have started ...	03:09
	yeah	03:09
kadoban	So usually you'd git checkout -b foobranch then make the commits, then etc. If you do it in the wrong order, you can do that but you should probably make 'master' go backwards to not include them	03:10
	← ketas left	03:10
pi-	yup, usually I do that. Yesterday I forgot.	03:10
	How can I tidy it up?	03:10
	git reset (2 commits); git pull ?	03:10
	→ akushner joined	03:11
	← mowcat left	03:13
	← thomasross left	03:14
	→ thomasross joined	03:15
	→ iam730 joined	03:17
	← jelmer left	03:19
	→ jelmer joined	03:19
	→ Avizini joined	03:21
	← rkazak left	03:21
	→ dreiss joined	03:21
kadoban	pi-: Yeah, that should work. Or just 'git checkout master && git reset --hard origin/master' I think does what you want IIRC (be careful, reset --hard is quite powerful, and if I misunderstood it could be annoying to fix)	03:21
pi-	`git reset --hard 4dc6253; git pull` fixed it. And I learned something. Thanks kadoban	03:21
	← BenderRodriguez left	03:21
pi-	yupperrr I always make a hard copy of my project folder before I use things like `-f` and `--hard`.	03:22
kadoban	Cool, glad to help.	03:23
	← andyhuzhill left	03:23
kadoban	By the way, my recommendation for the future would be: always 'git fetch' and check !lol or gitk --all . 'git pull' is not a good default command, IMO.	03:23
gitinfo	A nifty view of branches, tags, and other refs: git log --oneline --graph --decorate --all	03:23
	→ andyhuzhill joined	03:24
pi-	!lol	03:26
gitinfo	A nifty view of branches, tags, and other refs: git log --oneline --graph --decorate --all	03:26
pi-	nice	03:26
	→ BenderRodriguez joined	03:28
	← blackmesa left	03:31
	← Avizini left	03:32
	← BenderRodriguez left	03:33
	→ Avizini joined	03:34
	→ veegee joined	03:34
	→ jubal joined	03:34
	← TikityTik left	03:35
	← n3wborn left	03:36
	← jubal_ left	03:37
	→ TikityTik joined	03:37
	← snowgoggles left	03:37
	← andyhuzhill left	03:38
	→ andyhuzhill joined	03:39
	→ snowgoggles joined	03:40
	← pi- left	03:42
	lagothrix → Guest17640	03:43
	← Guest17640 left	03:43
	→ lagothrix joined	03:43
	→ BenderRodriguez joined	03:44
	← Spr0cket left	03:45
	← atrigent left	03:48
	← dreiss left	03:52
	→ zulutango joined	03:59
	← yyy left	03:59
	→ mobile_c joined	04:07
	→ elsheepo joined	04:13
	← mobile_c left	04:13
	→ mobile_c joined	04:13
	← andyhuzhill left	04:13
	→ andyhuzhill joined	04:14
	← mobile_c left	04:15
	→ mobile_c_ joined	04:15
	→ metrixx joined	04:16
	← andyhuzhill left	04:18
	→ andyhuzhill joined	04:19
	→ Spr0cket joined	04:19
	→ dreiss joined	04:22
	→ troulouliou_div2 joined	04:25
	← mobile_c_ left	04:27
	← dreiss left	04:27
	→ mobile_c joined	04:29
	← z8z left	04:31
	← Spr0cket left	04:31
	← TikityTik left	04:35
	→ TikityTik joined	04:37
	← Mattiaslndstrm left	04:41
	← orbyt_ left	04:44
	← mobile_c left	04:45
	→ Cabanoss- joined	04:45
	← Cabanossi left	04:46
	→ jab416171 joined	04:48
	→ mat001 joined	04:49
	← m0viefreak left	04:51
	← dpyro left	04:55
	← austin987 left	04:57
	← millerti left	05:00
	→ dpyro joined	05:01
	→ pks_ joined	05:02
	→ Spr0cket joined	05:03
	← pks left	05:04
	pks_ → pks	05:04
	→ ketas joined	05:05
	→ orbyt_ joined	05:09
	→ ozcanesen joined	05:09
	→ z8z joined	05:16
	← snowgoggles left	05:17
	← SpeakerToMeat left	05:18
	← elsheepo left	05:19
	← iam730 left	05:24
	← cdown left	05:25
	→ AfroThundr\|main joined	05:28
	metrixx → Guest41391	05:30
	→ metrixx_ joined	05:30
	← Guest41391 left	05:33
	← ezio left	05:35
	← paraxial left	05:36
	→ paraxial joined	05:36
	← thinkpad left	05:37
	→ iam730 joined	05:38
	← iam730 left	05:38
	→ cdown joined	05:39
	→ thinkpad joined	05:44
	← topdownjimmy left	05:53
	→ topdownjimmy joined	05:54
	→ duderonomy joined	05:55
	→ cd joined	05:59
	→ iam730 joined	06:00
	← iam730 left	06:02
	→ iam730 joined	06:02
	← oojacoboo left	06:02
	← iam730 left	06:04
	→ oojacoboo joined	06:04
	← wEs left	06:05
	→ iam730 joined	06:05
	→ wesbrown84 joined	06:09
	← iam730 left	06:10
	← kadoban left	06:11
	← GreenJello left	06:12
	wesbrown84 → wEs	06:12
	→ iam730 joined	06:12
	← andyhuzhill left	06:13
	→ andyhuzhill joined	06:14
	← thiago left	06:17
	← oojacoboo left	06:20
	← Cabanoss- left	06:20
	→ Cabanossi joined	06:20
	← irqq left	06:24
	← publio left	06:26
	← andyhuzhill left	06:28
	→ andyhuzhill joined	06:29
	← troulouliou_div2 left	06:31
	← wildlander left	06:31
	→ ezio joined	06:35
	← shentino left	06:36
	→ jonsmith1982 joined	06:37
	→ wildlander joined	06:38
jonsmith1982	Once ive sent a commit to repo the push changes to master, why when i try to pull to local branch does it say ... error: You have not concluded your merge (MERGE_HEAD exists).	06:39
	← duckonomy left	06:42
	→ sauvin joined	06:43
jonsmith1982	nm	06:44
	→ czart joined	06:45
	→ thiago joined	06:50
	← yqfvwal left	06:50
	← z8z left	06:52
	← KnoP left	06:55
	→ GreenJello joined	06:56
	← random_yanek left	06:56
	→ KnoP joined	06:58
	→ thunderbolt joined	06:58
	← ozcanesen left	06:59
	← raulp left	07:00
	→ raulp joined	07:01
	→ random_yanek joined	07:03
	→ duckonomy joined	07:04
	← thiago left	07:05
	→ ozcanesen joined	07:07
	← ozcanesen left	07:09
	→ libertyprime joined	07:11
	← plasticle left	07:12
	← duckonomy left	07:13
	→ duckonomy joined	07:15
	← errr left	07:18
	→ mobile_c joined	07:21
	← finalbeta left	07:21
	→ finalbeta joined	07:22
	← akushner left	07:28
	→ rsrx joined	07:38
	→ plasticle joined	07:40
	← jnewt left	07:41
	→ z8z joined	07:45
	← z8z left	07:46
	→ atrigent joined	07:46
	→ z8z joined	07:46
	← z8z left	07:47
	→ z8z joined	07:47
	→ errr joined	07:55
	← Goplat left	07:59
	→ oojacoboo joined	08:03
	→ apoos_maximus joined	08:03
	← apoos_maximus left	08:04
	→ apoos_maximus joined	08:04
	→ libin_v joined	08:05
	← libin_v left	08:05
	← oojacoboo left	08:07
	← z8z left	08:10
	← kezimo left	08:11
	→ kezimo joined	08:11
	← wgrant left	08:13
	← apoos_maximus left	08:15
	→ apoos_maximus joined	08:16
	→ irqq joined	08:17
	← cdown left	08:19
	→ wgrant joined	08:20
	← orbyt_ left	08:22
	→ sieve joined	08:25
	→ Cmaj6 joined	08:26
	→ hellux joined	08:26
	← hellux left	08:28
	← renich left	08:28
	← boshhead left	08:29
	← jonsmith1982 left	08:30
	→ boshhead joined	08:30
	→ renich joined	08:30
	← xcm left	08:31
	→ xcm joined	08:32
	→ cswl joined	08:34
	→ Silenced joined	08:36
	← mat001 left	08:38
	→ leeN joined	08:46
	→ manuelschneid3r joined	08:48
	← Avizini left	08:49
	← errr left	08:49
	← andyhuzhill left	09:03
	→ andyhuzhill joined	09:04
	← sieve left	09:04
	← apoos_maximus left	09:07
	← andyhuzhill left	09:08
	→ andyhuzhill joined	09:09
	← atrigent left	09:17
	→ shentino joined	09:22
	→ Fernando-Basso joined	09:25
	← shentino left	09:25
	← mobile_c left	09:26
	→ plexigras joined	09:27
	→ shentino joined	09:29
	→ nioncode joined	09:29
	→ i7c joined	09:29
	← andyhuzhill left	09:33
	← albel727 left	09:39
	← renich left	09:39
	→ estodiMania joined	09:43
	← estodiMania left	09:45
	→ blackntan joined	09:50
	→ mikecmpbll joined	09:56
	→ basiclaser joined	09:57
	← nowhere_man left	10:11
	← Cabanossi left	10:12
	← troyt left	10:13
	→ Cabanossi joined	10:13
	→ troyt joined	10:13
	→ sieve joined	10:16
	← catsup left	10:17
	→ catsup joined	10:18
	→ chaosruler joined	10:18
	→ yyy joined	10:18
	← catsup left	10:18
	→ catsup joined	10:19
	← TikityTik left	10:21
	← tango_ left	10:42
	→ elsheepo joined	10:44
	→ blackmesa joined	10:46
	→ tango_ joined	10:46
	← shentino left	10:52
	→ fiftysix joined	11:03
fiftysix	hi	11:03
	i know enough about git to use it with one branch	11:04
	but now i modified this guy's project on github and want to open a pull request	11:04
	is it possible to say "make 0-3 commits back a new branch and then make 3-10 commits back another branch" so that i can open pull requests for these new branches?	11:04
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	11:05
	→ fstd_ joined	11:07
	← fstd left	11:07
	fstd_ → fstd	11:07
	← netj left	11:10
	← revoltingPeasant left	11:10
	← blackmesa left	11:10
	→ netj joined	11:10
	← cswl left	11:12
	← flippo left	11:14
	← swalladge left	11:20
	← Cmaj6 left	11:20
	← dpyro left	11:23
	→ Makaveli7 joined	11:24
	→ finalbeta1 joined	11:27
	← finalbeta left	11:30
	← ali1234 left	11:40
	→ inkbottle joined	11:43
	→ Darcidride_ joined	11:43
	→ AtumT joined	11:44
	→ shentino joined	11:46
	→ sauercrowd joined	11:48
	← jngk left	11:48
	→ cswl joined	11:48
	→ jimmm joined	11:49
	← libertyprime left	11:49
	→ ali1234 joined	11:51
	→ randominternetus joined	11:54
	→ blackmesa joined	11:54
	← irqq left	11:55
randominternetus	Hi there, I need to do some modification on a project. Adding some features and editing some. It's all ok till here, I do a fork, do the changes and done. but how can I do that and benefit from the updates the original developers make to the project?	11:55
	how should be the workflow here?	11:55
fiftysix	hmm forget it ... all my commits are shit. i'll delete and re-fork the github project and make all new commits that are sensibly cherry-picked.	11:58
	← chaosruler left	12:02
	← elsheepo left	12:02
	→ shentino_ joined	12:10
	← shentino left	12:11
	→ Avizini joined	12:12
	→ apoos_maximus joined	12:13
	→ lucasb joined	12:15
	← Darcidride_ left	12:16
	← dermoth left	12:17
	← apoos_maximus left	12:19
	→ apoos_maximus joined	12:19
	→ Essadon joined	12:19
	→ dermoth joined	12:20
	← shentino_ left	12:22
	→ Darcidride_ joined	12:27
j416	fiftysix: you don't need to re-clone for that	12:27
	→ wootehfoot joined	12:27
j416	fiftysix: it's about three commands to do what you say above.	12:29
	randominternetus: work on a separate branch, rebase that atop upstream regularly	12:31
	← kent\n left	12:31
j416	randominternetus: keep the number of commits small; since rebase applies each commit onto a new base there's no guarantee that they'll still do what you expect -- always examine each commit after a rebase to see that they are still good	12:32
	→ xrexeon joined	12:33
	← xrexeon left	12:33
	← bn_work left	12:34
	← igemnace left	12:34
fiftysix	j416, i don't think what i say above suffices. the more i look at my commits, the more i find them really random. would there also be commands to undo all of my commits but keep my workspace the way it is? and then push that to github so that it also "forgets" about these commits?	12:37
	→ kent\n joined	12:41
	← troyt left	12:41
j416	...yes.	12:41
	← blackmesa left	12:42
	→ nowhere_man joined	12:43
	→ troyt joined	12:44
fiftysix	j416, can you tell me what i should read up on? :)	12:44
	← basiclaser left	12:47
	← tomaw left	12:49
	→ SuperKaramba joined	12:49
j416	fiftysix: read up on the git object model if you aren't familiar with that (what are commits, how do they refer to each other to create a branch), then read up on 'git reset' and 'git push'	12:49
	that should be enough to figure out what you need, I think	12:49
nedbat	fiftysix: are you saying you don't like the state of your code, or the state of your commits?	12:49
	← BenderRodriguez left	12:50
j416	!book	12:50
gitinfo	There are several good books available about git; 'Pro Git' is probably the best: http://git-scm.com/book but also look at !bottomup !cs !gcs !designers !gitt !vcbe and !parable	12:50
fiftysix	nedbat, the state of my code i'm happy with. but my commits are a mess. i want to delete all of them since point where i forked the project and re-do them so that each one of them contains makes sense.	12:51
	the*	12:51
j416	but I would recommend that if you use git frequently, you read all of that book and sae yourself a lot of headache down the road. Give it a day or two.	12:51
fiftysix	an actual dead tree book on git would be a nice thing for the bedside table	12:52
	but while i'm in the middle of something specific i'd be too antsy to read it	12:52
	so reading up on reset and push now	12:52
j416	fiftysix: that book iis available on amazon, I think	12:52
nedbat	fiftysix: do you know the name of the commit that you forked from?	12:52
j416	fiftysix: start with the object model; it'll make things easier.	12:53
fiftysix	nedbat, that's easy to find out, right? since they all have hashes...	12:53
	wow ... 35€ in germany o_O	12:53
j416	nedbat: I get the feeling that he actually wants to understand what happens and not get pre-baked commands..?	12:53
	← jimmm left	12:53
fiftysix	gonna put it in the shopping basket till birthday i guess	12:53
nedbat	j416: i'm not sure: "while i'm in the middle of something specific i'd be too antsy to read it"	12:53
	j416: also, I can explain some concepts while providing commands :)	12:54
fiftysix	hmm ... it's for free if you have a kindle. my gf has a kindle.	12:54
	→ avizini_ joined	12:55
	← Avizini left	12:57
j416	nedbat: maybe.	13:00
	→ blackmesa joined	13:01
fiftysix	j416, pre-baked would be fine for now. but then once i did the task i also want to understand what i did because this kind of thing will come in handy again and again.	13:01
j416	nod	13:01
	so you have one single branch with a few commits, and you want to remove all of the commits while keeping the work tree in the state it is now, so that you can make new commits, on a new branch?	13:03
fiftysix	correct, j416! well, a couple of branches would be better, so that they can become different pull requests. i implemented 2 new features and did 1 sweep of code cleanup, so i'm thinking 3 branches.	13:04
j416	but you still want to undo all commits because they make no sense?	13:05
fiftysix	yes. each and every one of them is a messy collection of unrelated changes. i think up until now i've been using git as kind of a fancy backup tool only...	13:05
j416	alright.	13:05
	find the hash of the commit right before your first commit, i.e. the one that you based your commits on.	13:05
fiftysix	j416, 4df6570	13:06
j416	oh and just in case; does 'git status' report clean, nothing to commit?	13:06
	make sure everything is committed.	13:06
fiftysix	i can just commit my current changes into another nonsensical commit, then it'll be clean.	13:06
j416	yes, do that	13:07
fiftysix	done.	13:07
j416	having things committed makes it easier to get them back in case things go wrong	13:07
fiftysix	"nothing to commit, working tree clean"	13:07
j416	great.	13:07
fiftysix	just in case i also duplicated the whole thing before.	13:07
j416	ah, good	13:08
	was just going to suggest you make a backup branch but then you've got that covered	13:08
	you can also simply keep note of the hash of the current commit and you can go back to that state if you need to	13:08
	(the one you just made)	13:08
	← blackntan left	13:08
j416	git reset 4df6570 # this will move your branch pointer so that it points to 4df6570, effectively "removing" any commits that come after that, while keeping your work tree untouched. If you run 'git status' after this, it should show all of the changes you made in all those commits together.	13:09
	← rsrx left	13:10
fiftysix	it told me a bunch of changes that it says are unstaged now	13:11
j416	(I say "removing" in quotes because they actually still exist, but they are not referenced by anything, you can still run 'git log <commit hash>' on any one of them for instance)	13:11
	fiftysix: good	13:11
fiftysix	looks like too little files	13:11
	hmm	13:11
j416	fiftysix: what does 'git log' say?	13:11
	any of your commits still there?	13:12
fiftysix	nope	13:12
j416	then you're all set	13:12
fiftysix	i guess i was mistaken	13:12
	yes	13:12
	the latest entry in the log is the last commit not made by me but the original author	13:12
j416	good	13:12
	git checkout -b newbranch # this will create and check out a new branch called "newbranch" (call it whatever you prefer)	13:12
	→ blackmesa1 joined	13:13
fiftysix	got one	13:13
j416	I assume you are familiar with 'git add' and 'git commit'? Use those to craft your first few commits.	13:13
fiftysix	yes	13:13
j416	you can add parts of a file using 'git add -p' if you like.	13:13
fiftysix	well, i want to use gitg for that, as it allows such nice cherry-picking	13:13
	fiftysix is a bit of a visual animal	13:14
j416	sure, that'll work	13:14
fiftysix	can i just make three new branches now?	13:14
	or do i have to finish this one first?	13:14
	← blackmesa left	13:14
j416	you could but then you would risk adding the same changes to each branch, maybe?	13:14
fiftysix	hmmm i see, naw, that's not good	13:15
j416	perhaps it's easier to finish one branch and then whatever changes are left go into another branch?	13:15
	so, add whatever changes you need to go into this branch, then leave the rest	13:15
fiftysix	k	13:15
	that'll take a while	13:15
j416	as many commits are you like of course	13:15
	np; I'll be around. highlight me later.	13:16
	unless you want all up-front, that's fine too	13:16
	just didn't want to overload with info	13:17
fiftysix	you're going at a really nice pace, j416!	13:17
	i'll finish this one and then highlight you later :)	13:17
j416	o/	13:18
	→ gareppa joined	13:19
	← gareppa left	13:19
	← inkbottle left	13:22
	→ inkbottle joined	13:22
fiftysix	j416, the first branch ended up only being one commit. so do i go back to master now and branch off again from there or do i branch off of the new branch?	13:23
j416	that's up to you. would you like the other branch to be based off of this one, or off of master?	13:24
	← nowhere_man left	13:25
j416	if these are completely unrelated changes that don't conflict with one another, I'd probably base both off of master. If they have some sort of relation where one needs to be before the other, I would consider basing one off of the other.	13:26
fiftysix	the goal is to allow the original author to decide which of my branches/PRs he'd like to accept and which not	13:27
	so, the first thing	13:27
j416	alright, so they're not related. I'd base both off of master, then.	13:27
fiftysix	okay	13:27
	fiftysix walks off to do the second branch	13:27
j416	you can either checkout master and do the same dance as before,	13:27
	or you can do that in one go with 'git checkout -b yetanotherbranch master'	13:28
	git checkout -b <newbranch> <start point>	13:28
fiftysix	oh that's nice! i might even be able to remember that command.	13:28
j416	'-b' is for branch.	13:28
	→ shadowswalker joined	13:29
j416	there's a risk that this won't work since it's not obvious that your changes can be 'floated' to the new branch that will be in the same state as master. If this is the case, git will not checkout the new branch.	13:29
	if the changes are completely unrelated as you say, there should be no issue.	13:30
shadowswalker	Hello guys, I was working on my project, I have my production version in master branch, and we all work on another branch development, last week we changed a the structure of project(renamed folders, moved folders, files). Now we have tested everything works in test, but when I am trying to merge this to our master, it gives conflict showing file migration/0001_initial.py deleted in HEAD but renamed in master	13:31
	branch	13:31
j416	shadowswalker: someone added changes to master without adding them to the dev branch, or your dev branch is out-of-date.	13:32
	→ avizini__ joined	13:33
shadowswalker	j416: Last commit in master is merge from dev branch, so how can It cause conflict ?	13:33
j416	shadowswalker: git log -1 master^2 # is this commit in your dev branch?	13:34
	← avizini_ left	13:35
shadowswalker	j416: yes, Its in the dev branch, after that I have merge, and now I want to merge again from dev	13:37
	→ Ninpo joined	13:37
Ninpo	Can someone help me please? I've accidentally made a PR with a branch that should have been based off master but I accidentally based it off another PR. How do I rebase so PR2 is based off master (and only has PR2's fixes) rather than it having both PR1 and PR2 in?	13:38
j416	shadowswalker: do you have commits in master that aren't merges from dev?	13:39
Ninpo	No. PR1 was branched from master and submitted. I forgot to branch from master again for PR2, so PR2 has both sets of fixes in	13:40
	Oh, not me	13:40
	sorry	13:40
Soni	error: object a7fc765d7baa51f07cc83f0efd5643a61595bf30: zeroPaddedFilemode: contains zero-padded file modes	13:40
	how to fix?	13:40
j416	Ninpo: probem solved?	13:40
shadowswalker	j416: I may have, but I have meged dev after that change fix problem at that time,	13:40
Ninpo	j416: no	13:41
	I thought you were talking to me I missed the shadowswalker mention	13:41
	← avizini__ left	13:41
	→ Avizini joined	13:41
j416	Ninpo: so, pr2-branch is based off of pr1-branch, but you want pr2-branch to be based off of master instead?	13:41
Ninpo	Yes	13:42
j416	Ninpo: git checkout pr2-branch && git rebase --onto master pr1-branch	13:42
Soni	nvm, fixed it with --single-branch and --branch 2.0.x	13:42
Ninpo	I just managed to find this, would this be correct? https://gist.github.com/iolloyd/4018744c054b223c035ed8233f1ea6ce	13:42
Soni	(is this a proper way to fix it?)	13:42
j416	Soni: what command is that?	13:42
Ninpo	j416: thank you	13:42
Soni	git clone	13:42
	j416: ^	13:42
	→ fstd_ joined	13:42
	← fstd left	13:43
	fstd_ → fstd	13:43
	→ tomaw joined	13:44
Ninpo	j416: that just tells me pr2-branch is up to date	13:44
j416	Ninpo: what does 'git log' say?	13:44
	(is it correct or still off?)	13:45
Ninpo	j416: it's still got the stuff from pr1 in	13:45
j416	Ninpo: what command did you run?	13:45
	exactly	13:46
Ninpo	git checkout exception_fixes && git rebase --onto master setup_fix	13:46
j416	and exception_fixes is PR2, setup_fix is PR1?	13:46
Ninpo	yes	13:47
j416	what's in master?	13:47
Ninpo	setup_fix was branched from master	13:47
	I've not touched master, still in line with upstream (neither are merged)	13:47
j416	then the above should work.	13:47
Ninpo	oh hang on...	13:47
Soni	is it okay to use git clone --single-branch --branch 2.0.x after getting an error like that?	13:48
Ninpo	my repo is a fork, looks like I went and merged setup_fix into my repo's master	13:48
	argh	13:48
j416	there you go	13:48
Ninpo	I shouldn't git when tired :(	13:48
	Better to trash mine and refork or is this fixable?	13:48
j416	Ninpo: you can just replace 'master' in that command with whatever commit you want it based off of.	13:48
Ninpo	Ah ok thank you	13:49
j416	Ninpo: or, if you prefer, reset master to that commit and just run the same command. same same.	13:49
	Soni: sure, that'll just not clone some things.	13:49
Soni	well, I don't need or want the other things	13:50
j416	that should be fine then	13:50
	shadowswalker: the only reason for there to be a conflict is if branch A has a change to something and branch B has a different change to the same thing.	13:51
	shadowswalker: so, master definitely has changes that dev doesn't.	13:52
	← Avizini left	13:52
shadowswalker	j416: I have checkout to previous commit, (in detached head), now i have merged successfully, How do I use that detached head as master now ?	13:52
j416	shadowswalker: are you saying you want to overwrite master (and then force-push it)?	13:53
shadowswalker	j416: yes it has, I actually removed somefiles in masters and committed, It seems wrong now..	13:53
	j416: yes,	13:53
j416	I hope you know the implications of that	13:53
shadowswalker	j416: I don't have any major change in master, It will work successfully in my recent merge in detached HEAD	13:53
j416	git checkout master && git reset --hard <commit>	13:53
	then you can force-push that if you need.	13:53
	→ Regon joined	13:53
j416	shadowswalker: sure, just think of your peers.	13:53
	they will have to rebase any branches they based off of the current master	13:54
	and they will have to reset their master.	13:54
	re-clone would of course work, too.	13:54
shadowswalker	j416: just one commit made the problem, No one except me is working on master(no merge), no branch is based on master..	13:54
j416	good good	13:55
	← fstd left	13:55
shadowswalker	j416: I found that no major changes should be done in masters, first in dev then merege to masters.. thanks..	13:55
j416	that makes a lot of sense, yes.	13:55
	fiftysix: all good?	13:57
	→ greatgatsby joined	13:57
	→ shentino joined	13:58
	→ fstd joined	14:01
Ninpo	j416: That's sorted it, thank you very much. Tidy git again :)	14:02
j416	Ninpo: o/	14:03
	→ freeman42x joined	14:03
	→ Nixew joined	14:06
	← blackmesa1 left	14:06
	← Silenced left	14:06
	← netj left	14:07
	→ netj joined	14:07
	→ irqq joined	14:12
	← Copenhagen_Bram left	14:15
	→ nowhere_man joined	14:18
	← Revan- left	14:18
	→ Revan- joined	14:18
fiftysix	j416, actually, no. i messed up because i had to temporarily remove some lines from three files before creating the next branch. then i finished that branch and wanted to go back onto master. now it demands "Please commit your changes or stash them before you switch branches"	14:21
	i undid and redid it two times already, but it seems i should have first commited them onto master before we did the reset.	14:21
j416	I'm not sure I follow	14:25
	← profmac left	14:27
	← apoos_maximus left	14:28
	← iam730 left	14:28
	← randominternetus left	14:29
	→ czart_ joined	14:30
	→ randominternetus joined	14:30
	← randominternetus left	14:30
	→ apoos_maximus joined	14:31
	← Ninpo left	14:33
	← czart left	14:34
	← hofmann3900 left	14:36
	→ mat001 joined	14:36
j416	fiftysix: if you could reword that explanation of the situation and what you want to do, that might help me understand.	14:37
	1) what do you have now; 2) what do you want	14:37
	→ nativetexan joined	14:38
nativetexan	good morning, anyone around?	14:39
j416	nativetexan: 950 people.	14:39
	→ profmac joined	14:39
nativetexan	thank you j416	14:39
j416	some away, probably.	14:39
nativetexan	i have a question about github stuff plz	14:40
j416	#github	14:40
nativetexan	oh ok	14:40
	i thank you	14:40
	have a great day	14:40
	← nativetexan left	14:40
j416	if you have a git question, this channel is the place; if it's just about github, .. he left.	14:40
	→ mobile_c joined	14:41
fiftysix	j416, not sure if i understand well enough to phrase properly. let me keep fiddling for a bit.	14:42
	→ mowcat joined	14:44
	← sauercrowd left	14:45
j416	o/	14:46
	← kjartan left	14:47
	→ czart joined	14:50
fiftysix	j416, okay, i'm back to a clean slate. we did the "git reset", then we created a new branch and i put a commit on it and checked out master again, which has a bunch of unstaged/uncommitted changes (including two new files) on it.	14:51
	→ kjartan joined	14:51
fiftysix	my question is: can i make changes to these files now before creating another branch?	14:52
	← czart_ left	14:54
	→ jottr joined	14:55
	← pks left	14:56
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	14:57
	→ shentino_ joined	14:57
	← shentino left	14:57
j416	fiftysix: yes; the order doesn't matter.	14:58
	fiftysix: the only issue might be if your new branch is _not_ based off of master, because then the more changes you add, the greater the risk that there'll be conflicts	14:59
	fiftysix: but if you're basing your new branch on the same state, there can be no conflict.	14:59
	if you should decide to make _commit(s)_ in master though, then of course you'd have to go back and clean those up if they don't belong there. still no issue though.	15:00
	← shadowswalker left	15:02
j416	I prefer to keep master as the latest stable state (i.e. prod), and to avoid I-missed-the-morning-coffee accidents, I try to always work on a separate branch. Moving things around is no issue if it turns out I didn't need the branch for whatever reason.	15:03
fiftysix	i'll for sure adopt that approach in the future ... this is too much brain acrobatics in the long run	15:04
	← Fernando-Basso left	15:05
j416	it'll all become clearer once you've read through some docs and gotten some more practice	15:05
	everything's just about poking at the commit graph in various ways to get it to look right	15:05
fiftysix	j416, okay, this time around it worked. continuing with the next branch / set of changes.	15:08
	oh wait. damnit. i was on master.	15:09
	sigh ... that's got to be the "i-missed-the-morning-coffee" accident you spoke of.	15:09
j416	haha.	15:12
fiftysix	damn, there it is again. but this time i have a screenshot!	15:13
	j416, what's happening here?https://imgur.com/a/2atNaSO	15:14
j416	fiftysix: git refuses to checkout master because doing so would mean it would have to merge those files to get the right state	15:20
	it can't simply irreversibly "float" the changes over	15:20
fiftysix	j416, but it worked for the first branch. why is it not working for the second branch anymore?	15:21
j416	you can still get the result you want though, given that the changes aren't related	15:21
	maybe on the first branch you committed no partial files	15:21
fiftysix	on the first branch i only committed files that are in an entirely different subdir.	15:22
	→ troulouliou_div2 joined	15:22
	→ diegoaguilar joined	15:23
fiftysix	as in, nothing that i want to do now, for the second branch, has anything to do with that first branch/its files/its commits whatsoever.	15:23
	if i'm understanding you correctly, there should be no issue.	15:23
	← apoos_maximus left	15:24
fiftysix	i did change some files on master though. i.e. after we did "git reset 4df6570". that must be the problem, right?	15:24
	← lucasb left	15:25
	← _xor left	15:27
	← Cabanossi left	15:28
j416	yes, don't do that	15:29
	so you have commits on master that you don't have in your new branches?	15:29
	of course you can do it, it'll just make your branches not based off of master anymore and .. as I understood it you wanted master clean?	15:30
	← VladGh left	15:30
fiftysix	no	15:30
	no commits	15:30
	just unstaged/uncommited changes	15:31
	→ VladGh joined	15:31
fiftysix	but still getting the message from the screenshot i linked	15:31
	→ Copenhagen_Bram joined	15:33
	← Darcidride_ left	15:33
	→ rkazak joined	15:37
	→ pks joined	15:37
	→ Darcidride_ joined	15:37
	→ sauercrowd joined	15:37
fiftysix	j416,	15:37
j416	only commits are "on branches"	15:38
	← Copenhagen_Bram left	15:38
j416	uncommitted changes are not tied to any branch	15:38
fiftysix	i see, sorry for the wrong use of terminology in that case	15:38
	but then i understand that screenshot even less	15:39
j416	so, you want to create a new branch based off of master, with those changes over one or more commits?	15:39
	i.e. the ones not yet committed in your screenshot	15:39
fiftysix	some of them	15:39
	→ Copenhagen_Bram joined	15:39
j416	one way would be to stash them, checkout the new branch, apply the stash: git stash && git checkout -b yetanotherbranch master && git stash pop	15:40
	another way would be to commit them and then cherry-pick that commit	15:40
	git add .	15:41
	er, enter too fast	15:41
fiftysix	oh wait	15:41
	so there's no way to avoid the situation in my screenshot?	15:41
j416	git add . && git commit && git checkout -b yetanotherbranch master && git cherry-pick theotherbranch	15:41
	← yyy left	15:41
j416	fiftysix: what situation, that you can't checkout master?	15:41
fiftysix	yes. where i'm on a "clean" master (i.e., nothing staged, nothing committed), then create a new branch, commit some stuff there, and want to get back to master without getting that error message.	15:42
	→ _xor joined	15:42
j416	correct; you can't in this case because you'd risk losing data.	15:44
	you have to create a commit with it somehow or other first so that you have the data safe	15:44
fiftysix	j416, sooo i could also make that commit on master and then "cherry-pick" it onto a newly created branch?	15:45
j416	(or, you can decide that you don't care if you lose data and run "git checkout -f master" -- that'll overwrite your changes in this case so don't do it, but it can be good to know)	15:45
	fiftysix: no because you can't checkout master	15:46
fiftysix	nono	15:46
	after that screenshot, i "git reset" again and deleted that branch	15:46
j416	there has to be a merge somewhere (not a merge commit, but a merge of data)	15:46
	ok well.. that didn't help much did it :D	15:46
fiftysix	well, at least it didn't create more problems, except for a misunderstanding between us :(	15:47
j416	just go back to what you had and try stashing, it'll probably work	15:47
	← Copenhagen_Bram left	15:47
fiftysix	the whole word of "to stash" sends shivers down my spine, i think that's why i never used "git stash" before	15:48
	but well, i got a copy	15:48
j416	does "commit" send less shivers?	15:48
fiftysix	yes :)	15:48
j416	we can skip stash completely.	15:48
fiftysix	it sounds friendly	15:48
	non-native-speaker problems perhaps	15:48
j416	(stash actually make a commit but you can't see it as easily)	15:48
fiftysix	oh	15:49
	→ Copenhagen_Bram joined	15:49
fiftysix	j416, let me ask a different way: from that clean master (i.e. no new branch created yet), what would be your preferred way?	15:49
	← troulouliou_div2 left	15:49
	→ mizu_no_oto joined	15:50
	← nowhere_man left	15:52
j416	I'd probably do it in the exact way as we did above; it's of course possible to do all branches "at once" instead of having to float changes back and forth but that still introduces the risk of adding the same change twice	15:53
	so I'd avoid it for that reason.	15:53
	← Copenhagen_Bram left	15:54
fiftysix	hmm	15:54
	that's what i'm trying to do	15:54
	branch by branch	15:55
	it worked for the first one	15:55
	then i tried again	15:55
	and the result was that screenshot (which i undid)	15:55
	← mobile_c left	15:55
	→ wEssBRowN84 joined	15:55
	→ nowhere_man joined	15:56
fiftysix	j416, in other words, i don't get why there's any changes floating back and forth. how to avoid it?	15:56
	→ Copenhagen_Bram joined	15:56
	→ novum joined	15:57
	novum → novumsensum	15:57
	novumsensum → novum	15:57
	wEs → Guest27482	15:58
	wEssBRowN84 → wEs	15:58
j416	fiftysix: stash or commit like I wrote above	15:58
	← Guest27482 left	15:58
j416	fiftysix: you can't avoid it without either stashing or committing (well, you could make a patch or something, dunno, at least you need to get rid of the uncommitted changes)	15:59
fiftysix	i see	15:59
	but i'm only stashing the uncommitted changes away on the new branch - once i go back to master, they'll be there again, minus the ones i committed on the branch. correct?	16:00
j416	no	16:00
	fiftysix scratches his head	16:00
j416	forget stash for now maybe	16:00
	think of stash as something very similar to commit	16:01
	and then read up on it later; we can manage without stash	16:01
fiftysix	okay	16:01
	→ beefjoe joined	16:02
j416	what state are you in now?	16:03
	→ fstd_ joined	16:04
fiftysix	j416, right now i'm on master. there are only unstaged/uncommited changes. there is the one branch that i created earlier and that has one commit. there are no other branches.	16:04
	j416, more precisely, there are 9 modified and 2 as-yet untracked files.	16:05
j416	what did you do to get from the branch you had before, to the current state?	16:05
fiftysix	git checkout master	16:06
j416	the one in the screenshot	16:06
fiftysix	oh	16:06
	wait	16:06
j416	you must have run 'git reset' at some point	16:06
fiftysix	yes	16:06
	so after the screenshot i did:	16:06
	git log (to get the hash of the last commit on master); git reset to that hash; git checkout master; git branch -d userdefs	16:07
	← fstd left	16:07
	fstd_ → fstd	16:07
j416	ok	16:10
	fiftysix: I think the easiest would be to just go back to where you were at in the screenshot and continue from there	16:10
	→ kapil____ joined	16:10
j416	sorry for the slow response times; I'm juggling conversations in multiple channels at the moment	16:11
	fiftysix: git checkout -b userdefs ecd0786	16:11
fiftysix	j416, that's really fine - i'm grateful you're helping me at all!	16:12
	j416, that's a hash i haven't seen before. why base the new branch on that?	16:13
	← alyptik left	16:14
	← fstd left	16:15
j416	fiftysix: it's where your branch was before you killed it	16:15
	at least according to your screenshot.	16:15
fiftysix	j416, oh right! "git reset" didn't kill the commit, only reset the pointer...	16:16
j416	ah, that'll fail	16:17
	can't do it in one command	16:17
fiftysix	good thing i didn't do anything yet :P	16:17
j416	it would have just erred out	16:17
fiftysix	based on what you said before	16:17
	i would now: "git checkout -b userdefs", then stage my 2 new files and half-dozen chunks, make my commit, then what?	16:18
j416	fiftysix: git checkout -b userdefs && git reset ecd0786	16:18
	two steps.	16:18
fiftysix	okay, let me try	16:18
	done.	16:19
	→ dpyro joined	16:19
fiftysix	j416, https://i.imgur.com/sLDeHzw.png	16:20
j416	fiftysix: exactly	16:20
	now you're at where you were a moment ago	16:21
	makes sense?	16:21
fiftysix	yes, 5 by 5	16:21
j416	not sure what that means but I assume it means something good. :D	16:21
	ok, next step	16:21
fiftysix	in US TV shows it means "i read you loud and clear". according to the urban dictionary it originated from the CB radio community	16:22
j416	ah	16:22
	there are various ways; I'd do it slightly differently but but let's keep it simple for now	16:22
fiftysix	okay	16:22
j416	commit all of those changes to just a single commit (we'll remove it later, just call it wip or whatever)	16:23
fiftysix	okay	16:23
	so git add .; git commit -a -m wip	16:23
	done	16:23
	now "git checkout master"?	16:24
j416	yeah sure, or 'git checkout -b yetanotherbranch master'	16:24
	(git checkout master && git checkout -b yetanotherbranch # will be equivalent)	16:24
fiftysix	i did "git checkout -b tempcomp master"	16:24
j416	okay¨	16:25
fiftysix	curiously, there is now an untracked file. very much so curiously as that file should be covered by .gitignore	16:25
	oh waaaaaaaaait that branch doesn't have a .gitignore file	16:25
j416	do you care about that file?	16:25
fiftysix	yeah, i care about it not being in git	16:25
j416	right	16:25
	→ thiago joined	16:26
j416	fiftysix: but it was created by something that was added in the userdefs branch?	16:26
	fiftysix: (does it belong there, or should it really be in an earlier commit?)	16:26
fiftysix	no. it came under the eyes of git by way of the .gitignore file vanishing when we created that new branch.	16:27
	→ fstd joined	16:27
j416	that I know	16:27
fiftysix	right now, if we don't add it, it doesn't hurt.	16:27
j416	so it was there from before and you just chose to add it to .gitignore in the userdefs branch	16:27
fiftysix	yes exactly	16:27
	creating a .gitignore file is part of the things i do in the userdefs branch	16:27
j416	alright; then either just leave it or remove it manually; whichever you prefer	16:28
fiftysix	okay	16:28
j416	(there's a command for this called 'git clean', useful to know for the future but overkill for now)	16:28
fiftysix	okay	16:28
j416	clean slate?	16:29
fiftysix	i've moved that file to /tmp, so yeah, clean slate	16:29
j416	git cherry-pick userdefs	16:29
fiftysix	j416, https://i.imgur.com/fIjWWm7.png	16:30
j416	alright, no problem	16:30
fiftysix	better screenshot: https://i.imgur.com/2Owh72v.png	16:30
j416	'git status' will show you which files are in conflict	16:30
	nice, just one	16:30
	edit that one to fix the conflict	16:31
	← fstd left	16:31
j416	you want it to have the changes that should go into _this_ branch as based off of master.	16:31
	the userdefs changes should not be there	16:31
fiftysix	okay	16:31
j416	i.e. the ones in commit userdefs^	16:31
fiftysix	it's just one chunk	16:31
j416	good good	16:31
	→ yyy joined	16:32
fiftysix	chunk is removed	16:32
	→ atrigent joined	16:32
fiftysix	so now "git add ReflowController/config.h"?	16:32
j416	fiftysix: I take it you're familiar with conflict resolution?	16:32
	a least a bit	16:32
	?	16:32
fiftysix	nnnnnnnnnnnnot too much tho	16:32
j416	alright	16:32
	make sure all the conflict markers are gone and that the file resembles what you want	16:32
fiftysix	i mean, i sort-of understand what just happened and why i had to remove that chunk	16:32
	it does now	16:33
j416	if it does then it's fine	16:33
	it should be a normal file that would compile	16:33
	(or whatever it does in your context)	16:33
	yes, add and then 'git cherry-pick --continue'	16:33
	or 'git commit', which is equivalent	16:33
fiftysix	okay, it wants me to commit.	16:34
j416	do it	16:34
fiftysix	i'll just keep the message "wip"	16:34
j416	yes	16:34
fiftysix	done	16:34
	git seems happy	16:34
	clean slate	16:34
j416	(you can avoid this commit step by giving cherry-pick "--no-commit" but I'm trying to keep it simple)	16:34
fiftysix	k	16:34
j416	right, so now we have a wip commit in the new branch which you will want to at least reword, or split into multiple proper commits	16:35
fiftysix	(i now have open browser tabs for reset, push, cherry-pick and clean, which i intend to read after we're done)	16:35
	← troyt left	16:35
j416	and userdefs has a commit that you don't need	16:35
fiftysix	aye to the first sentence	16:35
	aaand aye to the second	16:36
j416	so maybe go cleanup the userdefs branch to get that out of the way	16:36
	→ troyt joined	16:36
j416	git checkout userdefs && git reset --hard HEAD^	16:36
	should do it	16:36
fiftysix	yes, it did	16:36
j416	git checkout tempcomp	16:36
	git reset HEAD^	16:37
	add and commit as usual.	16:37
fiftysix	nice, all the changed files are there on the workspace again :)	16:37
	okay, this'll take a few minutes once more	16:37
j416	yes, except now based off of master	16:37
fiftysix	:)	16:37
j416	I think these are all the tools you need!	16:37
	for this scenario.	16:38
fiftysix	it's a bunch of new concepts	16:38
j416	yes; probably too much at once.	16:38
fiftysix	let me try to do the next round myself, i'll highlight you if there are problems	16:38
j416	alright	16:38
	o/	16:38
	← nowhere_man left	16:39
	→ Cabanossi joined	16:44
	→ alyptik joined	16:44
	→ TikityTik joined	16:44
	→ agowa338 joined	16:46
	→ nowhere_man joined	16:47
	← revoltingPeasant left	16:49
	← beefjoe left	16:50
	← kerframil left	16:53
	→ n3wborn joined	16:59
	← mizu_no_oto left	16:59
	→ fission6 joined	17:00
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	17:01
	→ martin-_-_ joined	17:06
martin-_-_	hi	17:06
Soni	how can I compact a repo?	17:07
martin-_-_	I got a git repository which I used for private. Due licensing I need to open/ publish two specific directory to a public git repository	17:08
	is that even doable with git?	17:08
thiago	Soni: git gc	17:09
	martin-_-_: yes, but it'll be a different repository, with completely separate history (if you want any history)	17:09
Soni	already ran it, still have 24213(?) objects	17:10
martin-_-_	thiago history would be ok for me	17:10
Soni	even with --aggressive	17:10
	I'm supposed to only have 1 branch	17:10
	→ gareppa joined	17:11
martin-_-_	thiago so I can use my local git and push only a specific directory to a remote repository ?	17:12
Soni	why's this so big and what can I do to make it better?	17:12
j416	Soni: well how many files do you have and how many commits?	17:12
Soni	j416: idk, how do I check that?	17:12
thiago	martin-_-_: no. Completely separate repository.	17:12
j416	Soni: git log --oneline \| wc -l	17:12
	→ Mattiaslndstrm joined	17:12
martin-_-_	you mean I need to split my current repository?	17:12
j416	Soni: then whatever to count files	17:13
thiago	martin-_-_: you'd delete those two dirs from your regular repository and then reimport them as a git submodule	17:13
Soni	3230 commits	17:13
	idk how to count files	17:13
martin-_-_	ah okay thiago	17:13
Soni	I guess find can do it	17:13
j416	yes	17:13
Soni	but idk how to use find	17:13
j416	doesn't really matter, just estimate	17:13
	is it 5 files?	17:13
	500?	17:13
	5 million?	17:13
thiago	Soni: expire ethe reflog, then git repack -a -d -f	17:13
	Soni: this is the best you can do. It will remove any unreferenced object.	17:14
j416	thiago: I believe he just cloned it	17:14
thiago	oh	17:14
Soni	350?	17:14
	I'm a they	17:14
thiago	then you already have the smallest number of files	17:14
Soni	and yeah I just cloned it	17:14
thiago	if your server didn't pack properly, then you can compress further, but it won't delete anything.	17:14
	← gareppa left	17:14
martin-_-_	Can I keep the existing history of the files which I gonna move to the new repository?	17:14
thiago	martin-_-_: yes, but in a new history	17:14
j416	Soni: so if say each commit changes maybe 8 files on average and you have 3000 commits, then that's 3000*8 -> 24000 objects	17:15
Soni	well it's github so it probably didn't pack properly, it never does anything properly	17:15
	→ apoos_maximus joined	17:15
thiago	martin-_-_: your old (private) history is still there, of course	17:15
	→ m0viefreak joined	17:15
Soni	(and I cloned a single branch)	17:15
j416	how large is it anyway?	17:15
Soni	thiago: how do I compress further?	17:15
thiago	Soni: git repack -a -d -f	17:15
j416	like thiago suggests you can try to use repack	17:15
martin-_-_	thiago do you have a online guide for my plan?	17:15
Soni	that seems to have done nothing	17:15
	guess it's just this big	17:16
thiago	martin-_-_: no, this isn't a common activity	17:16
	→ Bobdude joined	17:16
thiago	martin-_-_: what you're looking for: git filter-branch with --directory-filter to extract the directory into a completely new history, then you publish that repo	17:16
j416	Soni: you can try to weak the params to repack to have it compress potentially better, but in most cases it won't be a significant improvement.	17:16
thiago	martin-_-_: then git rm -r dirname/ in the old repository and reimport as git submodule	17:16
martin-_-_	thanks thiago	17:17
thiago	martin-_-_: hint: usually, when publishing old proprietary content, you don't publish history	17:17
	← SJr left	17:17
	← ezio left	17:17
Soni	10 MB :(	17:18
	(as seen by git push)	17:18
	← sauercrowd left	17:18
	→ SJr joined	17:19
	→ iNCoNFuN joined	17:20
	thiago wonders if anyone has considered using zstd for compression in git, instead of (or in addition to) zlib	17:22
	→ cdown joined	17:24
	→ mizu_no_oto joined	17:25
	← Cabanossi left	17:25
	← revoltingPeasant left	17:26
	→ troulouliou_dev joined	17:28
	→ metrixx joined	17:30
	← metrixx_ left	17:33
j416	Soni: doesn't seem particularly large?	17:34
	← iNCoNFuN left	17:34
Soni	okay	17:34
	← ali1234 left	17:35
Soni	it does have plenty of images	17:35
	→ ali1234 joined	17:35
Soni	they're .gif	17:35
	all of them	17:35
	← n3wborn left	17:37
	← R2robot left	17:37
	← kusmario_ left	17:37
	→ kusmario joined	17:38
Soni	eh w/e	17:39
	→ R2robot joined	17:42
	← raffo left	17:42
	→ horribleprogram joined	17:48
horribleprogram	I'm stopping all development work until every project is a git project	17:48
_ikke_	horribleprogram: nice for you	17:50
	← mizu_no_oto left	17:53
horribleprogram	_ikke_: well it comes from necessity	17:53
	→ akushner joined	17:58
	→ Goplat joined	18:01
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	18:01
	thiago hates when he finds out that a project he's packaging is hosted in mercurial	18:02
	← Inline left	18:04
	→ Inline joined	18:04
	→ raffo joined	18:05
	← inkbottle left	18:07
horribleprogram	thiago: what is "packaging", who is "hosting in mercurial"	18:10
_ikke_	horribleprogram: most likely distro packages	18:10
	like deb / rpm / apk	18:10
horribleprogram	_ikke_: Interesting, I never thought about how deb repos are stored	18:11
_ikke_	That's something seperate	18:12
horribleprogram	that's deep and requires some pretty advanced concepts to understand.	18:12
_ikke_	This is mostly a matter of getting the source	18:12
horribleprogram	_ikke_: ahhh	18:12
	→ aw1 joined	18:14
	← Khisanth left	18:14
	← Darcidride_ left	18:16
	← alyptik left	18:18
	→ Darcidride_ joined	18:19
	→ iNCoNFuN joined	18:22
	← kapil____ left	18:23
	← rkazak left	18:27
	→ sauercrowd joined	18:28
	→ Khisanth joined	18:28
	← horribleprogram left	18:39
	← czart left	18:42
	→ iam730 joined	18:45
	← SuperKaramba left	18:45
	← sauercrowd left	18:46
	→ BenderRodriguez joined	18:47
	← iNCoNFuN left	18:52
	→ orbyt_ joined	18:56
fiftysix	j416, https://github.com/dasaki/nanoReflowController/pulls ... all mine :-D ... I have another one, but that is based on the code cleanup very heavily, so i'd prefer if the maintainer merges these first before i continue.	18:57
	← troulouliou_dev left	18:58
j416	fiftysix: hah! that's awesome. good job!	18:59
	fiftysix: next step: https://tbaggery.com/2008/04/19/a-note-about-git-commit-messages.html	18:59
	← kjartan left	18:59
	← cd left	19:00
fiftysix	j416, oh, yeah, my brain is a little bit too mushy for that now, but thank you for the link :)	19:00
	← Darcidride_ left	19:01
	→ ngui_ joined	19:01
	→ cfoch joined	19:02
	→ Darcidride_ joined	19:03
	→ kjartan joined	19:03
	← ngui left	19:04
	ngui_ → ngui	19:04
	→ sauercrowd joined	19:04
fiftysix	oooooooooh my god	19:10
	← orbyt_ left	19:10
	→ blackmesa1 joined	19:10
fiftysix	j416, i'm just seeing that when you start merging these branches, they don't stack without conflicts :(	19:10
	j416, if i merge them now and then offer the branch that has them all merged as another PR to the maintainer, would he be able to merge that onto his master?	19:11
	→ orbyt_ joined	19:11
	← Darcidride_ left	19:12
	← filcab left	19:13
	← sauercrowd left	19:14
	→ filcab joined	19:14
	→ Darcidride_ joined	19:14
	→ sauercrowd joined	19:14
j416	fiftysix: if they depend on each other, that's tricky yes	19:16
	make on PR at a time or just make one PR, maybe	19:16
	dunno	19:16
	ask the maintainer what that person prefers	19:16
	I always try to avoid merging things that are not based on the tip of the branch, when possible	19:17
	also, just because Git says everything merges fine, that doesn't mean it will actually work	19:17
	syntactically it might have merged fine, but that is not to say that semantially it's off	19:18
fiftysix	omg you're right	19:18
	it's not compiling	19:18
	what have i done	19:18
	→ treehug88 joined	19:18
j416	interactive rebase to the rescue.	19:19
	but I've no more time today, sorry.	19:19
fiftysix	tbh all this stuff feels a lot like lying	19:19
j416	read up on it.	19:19
fiftysix	don't worry j416	19:19
	i might just fix this the old-fashioned way	19:19
	(like lying as in, the amount of mental effort required to juggle it all and keep the construct intact)	19:19
	← ali1234 left	19:22
	→ ali1234 joined	19:22
	→ Rboreal_Frippery joined	19:25
	← Darcidride_ left	19:26
	← revoltingPeasant left	19:27
Rboreal_Frippery	How do you do the equiviliant of "git reset --hard", but keeping all revisions until then? For example, I committed 'a' , then 'b' , but 'b' had many mistakes. I want to make the whole repository look like 'a' again, but still be able to bring up how files looked in 'b' if I need to later on for reference. So the new revision 'c' should look data wise exactly like 'a'.	19:28
	→ alyptik joined	19:28
	← YuGiOhJCJ left	19:29
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	19:30
	← apoos_maximus left	19:31
	← cswl left	19:32
	→ jottr_ joined	19:34
_ikke_	man git revert	19:34
gitinfo	the git-revert manpage is available at https://gitirc.eu/git-revert.html	19:34
	← jottr left	19:34
	→ fstd joined	19:37
moritz	if you have many commits that you want to undo, you can also do git reset --soft a	19:37
	and then commit	19:37
	→ navidr joined	19:38
	← sauercrowd left	19:39
	→ kadoban joined	19:39
	← jottr_ left	19:40
	← sjoshi left	19:40
	→ sauercrowd joined	19:40
	→ ferdna joined	19:42
	← revoltingPeasant left	19:42
	→ jottr_ joined	19:42
	← mona_x left	19:42
	← Regon left	19:42
	→ Regon joined	19:43
	→ boombatower joined	19:50
	← fission6 left	19:51
	→ Phylock joined	19:58
	← boombatower left	20:01
	→ boombatower joined	20:03
	← yyy left	20:06
	← sieve left	20:07
	← boombatower left	20:11
	→ boombatower joined	20:11
	jottr_ → jottr	20:19
	← blackmesa1 left	20:21
	← mattcen left	20:21
	→ mattcen joined	20:25
	← dex1983 left	20:25
	→ energizer joined	20:28
grawity	Rboreal_Frippery: `git checkout a . && git commit`	20:30
	→ dege joined	20:31
	← flying_sausages left	20:32
energizer	how do i checkout the branch that has these pull request commits? https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/pull/1655	20:35
	→ h1d joined	20:37
	← h1d left	20:37
	→ libertyprime joined	20:37
j416	energizer: did you make the PR?	20:37
	(do you have the branch?)	20:38
moritz	grawity: doesn't work for additions/deletions	20:38
energizer	j416: no it's not me	20:40
j416	energizer: find the latest commit of it, check out that to a new branch	20:40
	← martin-_-_ left	20:40
moritz	https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14947789/github-clone-from-pull-request	20:40
energizer	ah answer seems to be `git fetch origin pull/1655/head:desired_local_branch_name`	20:41
	thanks	20:42
	← mattcen left	20:42
_ikke_	sounds about right	20:45
	→ mattcen joined	20:47
energizer	hm i'm not sure i got the right thing	20:54
	"Lucas-C force-pushed the voyages-sncf-technologies:master branch 2 times, most recently from b56d973 to d4f9e06 on Oct 25, 2017"	20:54
	i'd like to diff those commits, but i don't see how to check them out	20:55
	fatal: bad revision 'b56d973'	20:55
rewt	b56d973 is in the voyages-sncf-technologies repo	20:55
	which is a fork of the repo you're looking at	20:56
energizer	rewt: so the commits on that fork never come into the main repo, even though the PR was merged?	20:56
rewt	the way github (and gitlab and others) handle cross-repo merges is not standard git; they're doing magic behind the scenese to be able to do that	20:57
	right, there's a new commit created, which is a different hash	20:57
energizer	can i add the github fork as a branch in git?	20:58
_ikke_	a fork is an entire repository	20:58
	it has multiple branches	20:58
	← manuelschneid3r left	20:58
energizer	can i add the fork's master as a branch then?	20:59
_ikke_	You can add the entire repository as a remote, and then you can fetch branches from it	20:59
energizer	ok i'll try that	20:59
	← mattcen left	21:00
	→ cybrNaut joined	21:01
	→ figurehe4d joined	21:02
	→ mattcen joined	21:02
	→ \void joined	21:05
	→ manuelschneid3r joined	21:08
	← figurehe4d left	21:09
	← dpyro left	21:10
energizer	i think i downloaded the branch, now i want to check out the commit on the left https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/compare/60a830731b4494bb6aee0473a9e12d3800368ca5..11101f130353bcb2a43f04e3b5bc366ac50b2616	21:10
	→ dpyro joined	21:10
energizer	git checkout 60a830731b4494bb6aee0473a9e12d3800368ca5 says 'reference is not a tree'	21:11
	← wootehfoot left	21:11
ali1234	so a quirk of how github works is that commits don't actually have to exist in the repository	21:14
	so 60a... must be from some other fork	21:14
	→ dustinm joined	21:14
	← dpyro left	21:15
ali1234	neither of them in the voyages-sncf-technologies repo either	21:18
	energizer: where did you find those references?	21:19
	← btree_ left	21:19
	→ dpyro joined	21:20
	→ wootehfoot joined	21:20
energizer	ali1234: https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/pull/1655#issuecomment-336118198	21:21
	→ elsheepo joined	21:24
ali1234	energizer: you can fetch the pull request directly	21:24
	← ferdna left	21:24
ali1234	git fetch origin pull/1655/head:foo; git checkout foo	21:25
	those references don't even exist in the pull request, but maybe that does not matter	21:25
energizer	ali1234: how do i check out the 60a8 commit?	21:26
ali1234	i don't know... it doesn't seem to exist	21:26
energizer	but github is showing it in the web ui ^	21:27
ali1234	that doesn't mean much	21:27
	← sauercrowd left	21:27
energizer	i think it's showing the actual content of the files on the left hand side of that compare/ page	21:28
ali1234	it's comparing two trees	21:28
energizer	so the github message "Lucas-C force-pushed the voyages-sncf-technologies:master branch 2 times, most recently from b56d973 to d4f9e06 on Oct 25, 2017" means maybe he amended it?	21:31
ali1234	yes, and that changes the ids	21:31
	when you force push the old commits aren't exactly deleted... but they are unconnected and get garbage collected later	21:32
	← mattcen left	21:33
energizer	i see. thanks	21:33
ali1234	with a "normal" git server you can ask for arbitrary object ids but github doesnt support this	21:34
	← libertyprime left	21:34
ali1234	you can also see https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/commit/60a830731b4494bb6aee0473a9e12d3800368ca5	21:35
	even though that commit doesn't exist when you clone	21:35
	→ flying_sausages joined	21:36
	← JanC left	21:37
ali1234	in the final pull request that seem to be equivalent to https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/commit/6bdbe5640b151efee453cd501f0f274f5327a5a1 which you can get by the method i gave above	21:38
	at least it has the same commit message	21:38
	→ JanC joined	21:40
	→ mattcen joined	21:41
	← boombatower left	21:41
	← Mattiaslndstrm left	21:43
	→ iloop joined	21:43
	→ sieve joined	21:54
	← sieve left	21:54
j416	ali1234: which server is that?	22:05
ali1234	i'm not sure, but github is pretty much the only one i've ever seen where it doesn't work	22:05
j416	I don't think you can arbitrary ask for an object directly with a given ID unless there's a ref tied to it	22:05
	ali1234: where's one you've seen ot work?	22:06
	→ nilshi joined	22:06
j416	it*	22:06
	I may be wrong but that's my understanding.	22:06
	man git-fetch says the protocol wasn't designed for theft prevention but I think at least it tries to make it difficult.	22:07
gitinfo	the git-fetch manpage is available at https://gitirc.eu/git-fetch.html	22:07
ali1234	hmm hang on let me check	22:07
	what you mean by "ref tied to it" exactly?	22:08
nilshi	Hello. I have my git repositories on a shared host. smart http is not available. I don't like dumb http (no --depth etc. ) so I set up the git daemon. That works fine except I only have a custom part. That is very fragile for long term availability, one server move and my git is not available anymore. Any recommendations how I can keep my git URLs stable? (except switching to http, which I will do as a last	22:08
	resort)	22:08
j416	ali1234: any ref, such as a branch	22:08
nilshi	s/part/port	22:08
ali1234	j416: but it doesn't have to be the tip right?	22:08
j416	I haven't tried to exploit the protocol; I don't know.	22:08
ali1234	consider shallow submodules	22:09
	you can still fetch them if they are not the tip of a branch or tagged	22:09
	except not on github	22:09
	→ yyy joined	22:10
j416	can you fetch it even if it's not referenced at all?	22:11
	i.e. you push a branch and then delete that branch ref	22:11
ali1234	i'm not sure and i can't remember the syntax to do it	22:11
j416	alright, just checking. so does that mean that...	22:11
	> ali1234 with a "normal" git server you can ask for arbitrary object ids but github doesnt support this	22:11
	...is a guess?	22:11
ali1234	yes	22:11
j416	not trying to put you against the wall, just trying to learn.	22:12
	ok, thanks.	22:12
ali1234	i mean, you can always ask for arbitrary objects, but the server might tell you to get lost...	22:12
j416	yes	22:12
	← mattcen left	22:13
ali1234	it's a bit annoying with shallow submodules cos even though it records the sha1 and it might work today, if more commits are pushed to the branch your project can no longer be cloned successfully	22:15
	if the submodule is on github that is	22:15
	→ rick8024 joined	22:16
	→ mattcen joined	22:17
	← KnoP left	22:17
	rick8024 → KnoP	22:17
ali1234	j416: so apparently this is all configurable	22:22
j416	where is it configurable?	22:22
	on github?	22:22
ali1234	no in git	22:22
j416	ah.	22:22
ali1234	there are options uploadpack.allowTipSHA1InWant, uploadpack.allowReachableSHA1InWant, or uploadpack.allowAnySHA1InWant	22:23
	they do exactly what they say :)	22:23
_ikke_	Depends on your interpretation of what they say :P	22:24
	← mattcen left	22:25
	→ m1m0 joined	22:26
	→ math-alpha joined	22:28
	→ mattcen joined	22:30
ali1234	github uses (the equivalent of) uploadpack.allowTipSHA1InWant, i'd like them to use uploadpack.allowReachableSHA1InWant but it's expensive and probably incompatible with their infra, and uploadpack.allowAnySHA1InWant is cheap but it exposes all your "deleted" stuff as well	22:30
	← navidr left	22:31
	→ blackmesa1 joined	22:31
j416	ali1234: I didn't know this was configurable. til; thanks!	22:32
	← fstd left	22:32
	→ fstd joined	22:33
	← math-alpha left	22:35
	← ghost43 left	22:37
	→ ghost43 joined	22:37
	← Nixew left	22:39
	← m0viefreak left	22:40
	→ math-alpha joined	22:40
	← plexigras left	22:44
	→ m0viefreak joined	22:47
	← ekleog left	22:48
nilshi	does git clone honor DNS SVR ports?	22:52
	→ ekleog joined	22:52
	→ Zexaron joined	22:52
nilshi	it doesn't seem like it. which is sad	22:57
	← blackmesa1 left	23:03
	← mattcen left	23:04
	→ swalladge joined	23:09
	→ mattcen joined	23:11
	← kjartan left	23:11
	← iloop left	23:12
	→ iloop joined	23:13
	→ snowgoggles joined	23:14
	→ kjartan joined	23:14
	← elsheepo left	23:16
	→ libertyprime joined	23:21
	→ blackmesa1 joined	23:22
	← atrigent left	23:23
	→ blackmesa joined	23:25
	← libertyprime left	23:26
	← blackmesa1 left	23:27
	← fiftysix left	23:31
	← m0viefreak left	23:31
	→ m0viefreak joined	23:33
	← paraxial left	23:36
	← wootehfoot left	23:37
	← irqq left	23:38
	← dpyro left	23:39
	→ dpyro_ joined	23:39
	← Phylock left	23:40
	← dpyro_ left	23:40
	→ revoltingPeasant joined	23:40
	→ dpyro joined	23:42
	← m0viefreak left	23:49
	→ libertyprime joined	23:52
	← yyy left	23:55
	← jottr left	23:57

Logs Search ←Prev date Next date→

Channels Documentation