| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:42 |
ProLoser|Work |
i'm curious to learn more about this userplugin, is there somewhere i can check it out? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:39 |
alkemann |
heh ur excused ;) |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
ACTION apologizes for code pasting. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
put your method name inside '' |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
alkemann |
rigth thanks |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
} |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
return array('start', 'startCase', '', 'endCase', 'end'); |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
function getTests() { |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:38 |
markstory |
getTests |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:37 |
alkemann |
OT. what was that trick to only run one of the tests in a testcase (besides commenting out or renaming) |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:35 |
alkemann |
but if gwoo is fine with it, then i guess im too :) |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:35 |
markstory |
meh |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:35 |
alkemann |
yea git makes me like to work that way. i just felt it a bit unclean pushing these events to the public repo |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:35 |
markstory |
so 1.3-bake had about 6 branches on my computer. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:35 |
markstory |
I use lots of small branches personally. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
markstory |
because I don't care about them. How I got to the end is normally not important. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
markstory |
and I don't make branch names that others understand |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
gwoo |
both |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
markstory |
I don't squash merges |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
alkemann |
markstory: do u do this? or do you work on the locally tracking branch? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
gwoo |
alkemann: looks fine to me |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:34 |
gwoo |
alkemann: why? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:32 |
markstory |
you can squash the merge commit as well. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:32 |
alkemann |
then maybe these local development branches should be named something that makes sense to public .. like "local-2.0" |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:31 |
alkemann |
ok |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:31 |
markstory |
at least that's how I understand it. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:31 |
markstory |
because without the merge commit there would be no way to find out the commit's parent previous to the merge. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:30 |
gwoo |
alkemann: ask the git guys not me |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:30 |
markstory |
not if there was no merge commit. |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:30 |
alkemann |
wouldnt that be checkout the commit before the merged commits? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:30 |
markstory |
so you can undo the merge |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:30 |
alkemann |
gwoo: ^ |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:28 |
alkemann |
paralell conversation.. bit confusing. but about these merges, as i understood it, the merge is just saying that these commits should be associated with this branch, if there are no conflicts, why is there made a commit of the merge? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:28 |
ProLoser|Work |
hey is there a url i can checkout this userplugin you guys are talking about? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:27 |
alkemann |
the speccs for the userplugin as i understood it isnt totally compatible with the "old" as it removes any field that should be in a "profile" model and the group_id isnt part of the users table etc |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:25 |
gwoo |
alkemann: unless there is an easy way to upgrade people |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:25 |
gwoo |
alkemann: they are part of the history, i just need to check what they merged so i can show it |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:25 |
alkemann |
gwoo: so we must threat the existing plugin and table as legacy code to be compatible with? |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:24 |
Phally |
gwoo: hehe good morning then :) |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:24 |
gwoo |
) |
| # |
Jul 20th 2009, 09:24 |
gwoo |
Phally: no, just woke up |