From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24965 invoked by alias); 23 Jul 2015 01:46:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 35863 Received: (qmail 21936 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2015 01:46:25 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments :references:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=ZlhztAzq9/PWfQBVDt0eGKCBYwMokt3CyBIu7ex9MiM=; b=lhe2SS0tFU7ufHpJrnjXQSNCUTX34G30nZE9g4bPbtt3uxOQmOWkep1c6nldmT9Xf5 wNxiJXk2mPUEBmnRFuNzZG//N1NRlEKs6enSVkehiWpmM4iDSxo3LNFJS+58teOct4w4 pa2jVJrndj9RboW5NDXCjGW8L+m9MR6liW1wEqpNLJ03pJK8+WNhHFHyvkAfOMzVcBBB ge06V7j5UHz4QxGo1o8WnqAaR5Ur4GsqNWxgSXQpACEVkZBNAm9Jf8tcAy2glNDUrDxs UG5VTRILHzEpUSGMrqH9ZpweAbkHxxjm4aQni3XJpwxESqdokYJiVIhlOZHQcPBC+Xz5 O/lQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnxkCpuTYUTzzuOFgm/T3TgRtezYfj3uFi+cZgG7R30AJv+pisyY5NW3TKcCYSZdWFVnjmw X-Received: by 10.182.211.66 with SMTP id na2mr5571442obc.43.1437615980523; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 18:46:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <150722184618.ZM339@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 18:46:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: Comments: In reply to Mikael Magnusson "Re: bug with named pipes and process substitution" (Jul 23, 3:03am) References: <20150722100944.0d38f261@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20150722105829.43856c6d@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20150722112713.27f51642@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <150722074512.ZM16412@torch.brasslantern.com> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh workers Subject: Re: bug with named pipes and process substitution MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 23, 3:03am, Mikael Magnusson wrote: } } > "git stash"-ing all my changes to re-apply after sourceforge is back. } } Why would you do that rather than just committing them? Because (a) I spent the last six days thinking "gee, they've got to be back on line any minute now" and (b) I prefer to "git pull" and then edit the ChangeLog to reduce the chances of a conflict on ChangeLog, because (c) even with --rebase I find the way git handles overlapping diffs in a file that grows at the top to be really annoying and (d) I want the ChangeLog entry to be the same commit as the rest of the diff.