threads / discuss / 2381

GIT 0.99.9e

Subject: GIT 0.99.9e

## tl;dr

5 messages between Nov 7, 2005 and Nov 7, 2005.

replies: 4people: 5as markdown or json

Junio C Hamano· Nov 7, 2005, 05:43 UTC · lore
GIT 0.99.9e maintenance release is found at the usual places:
RPM, tarballs, and deb:
	http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/
With git, fetch maint branch from
	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/

It contains everything from the master branch. Since we seem to be shelving the separate git binary directory idea indefinitely, what we have here is pretty much what will be in 1.0, from the source code POV.

 - http-push seems to still have a bug or two but that is to be
   expected for any new code, and I am reasonably sure it can be
   ironed out; preferably before 1.0 but it is not a
   showstopper.
 - I've done the initial round of package splitting for Debian
   side myself, but it probably needs proofreading and fixing by
   experienced Debian person.  Similar RPM package splitting
   that parallels the above is needed.  Although it is not an
   absolute requirement for my sources to have perfect binary
   packaging support (I am just an upstream for binary
   packagers), it is certainly desirable to have RPM specs and
   debian/ files in a presentable shape for 1.0.
 - I still need to go over the tutorial and core-ish
   documentation once for consistency checks.
Changes since 0.99.9d are:
    Johannes Schindelin:
      Allow GIT_DIR to be an absolute path
      http-fetch: do not use curl_message after releasing it
    Jon Loeliger:
      Refactor merge strategies into separate includable file.
    Junio C Hamano:
      test: t4102-apply-rename fails with strict umask (Peter Baumann).
      git-format-patch: silly typo fix.
      Documentation: pull/clone ref mapping clarification (Josef Weidendorfer).
      git-fetch: fail if specified refspec does not match remote.
      Simplify CFLAGS/DEFINES in Makefile
      Package split: Debian.
      Install asciidoc sources as well.
      Further Debian split fixes.
      Debian: test build.
      Merge in http-push first stage.
      Document expat dependency when using http-push.
      ls-files: --others should not say unmerged paths are unknown.
      git-status: do not mark unmerged paths as committable.
      Set up remotes/origin to track all remote branches.
    Nick Hengeveld:
      Add support for pushing to a remote repository using HTTP/DAV
      Verify remote packs, speed up pending request queue
      Support remote references with slashes in their names
      Improve lock handling
      Refresh the remote lock if it is about to expire
    Paul Collins:
      http-push.c: include with angle bracket, not dq.
    Randal L. Schwartz:
      Use fink/darwinport paths for OSX
Johannes Schindelin· Nov 7, 2005, 11:43 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: GIT 0.99.9e

Hi,
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>  - http-push seems to still have a bug or two but that is to be
>    expected for any new code, and I am reasonably sure it can be
>    ironed out; preferably before 1.0 but it is not a
>    showstopper.

I am reasonably sure that a run with valgrind will show the way to a stable http-push. It is just a little memory corruption: the rest works wonderfully.

Ciao, Dscho

Nick Hengeveld· Nov 7, 2005, 15:47 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: GIT 0.99.9e

On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:43:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>  - http-push seems to still have a bug or two but that is to be
>    expected for any new code, and I am reasonably sure it can be
>    ironed out; preferably before 1.0 but it is not a
>    showstopper.

It seems like a minor point, but is this the appropriate name or should it be dav-push? Not that there's anything else in the works AFAIK but it's certainly possible that something else could run over HTTP later on.

-- 
For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
H. Peter Anvin· Nov 7, 2005, 17:08 UTC · re: Nick Hengeveld · lore

Re: GIT 0.99.9e

Nick Hengeveld wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:43:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> 
>> - http-push seems to still have a bug or two but that is to be
>>   expected for any new code, and I am reasonably sure it can be
>>   ironed out; preferably before 1.0 but it is not a
>>   showstopper.
> 
> It seems like a minor point, but is this the appropriate name or should
> it be dav-push?  Not that there's anything else in the works AFAIK but
> it's certainly possible that something else could run over HTTP later
> on.
> 
Push over HTTP POST would at least be theoretically possible.
	-hpa
Ingo Oeser· Nov 7, 2005, 19:02 UTC · re: Nick Hengeveld · lore

Re: GIT 0.99.9e

On Monday 07 November 2005 16:47, Nick Hengeveld wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 09:43:19PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> >  - http-push seems to still have a bug or two but that is to be
> >    expected for any new code, and I am reasonably sure it can be
> >    ironed out; preferably before 1.0 but it is not a
> >    showstopper.
> 
> It seems like a minor point, but is this the appropriate name or should
> it be dav-push?  Not that there's anything else in the works AFAIK but
> it's certainly possible that something else could run over HTTP later
> on.
e.g. GIT encapsulated in SOAP
/me *ducks* and *runs*
Ingo Oeser

← back to recent threads