ti sync should only fetch if there is no 'ticgit' branch in $repo

[jeffWelling]

Currently, ti sync is painfully slow because it attempts a git fetch $repo before performing the git pull and git push. The fetch should only be performed if there is no 'ticgit' or 'ticgit-ng' branch in $repo as we currently have it. This will prevent superfluous slowdowns but will still perform the fetch if we aren't aware of a branch we can use yet.

[jeffWelling]

Fubar?

[jeffWelling]

If this change is made, perhaps TicGit should also print a small warning such as:
"Make sure to use git fetch to keep your remotes up to date. See X for more info."

[frioux]

Not sure if this should be a new issue or part of this, but ti sync dies with a stack trace if you haven't pushed ticgit yet.

[jeffWelling]

Are you trying master or deving? This sounds like a new issue, can you file it with as much info as you can provide?
Also, it looks like the last gem was pushed with debug lines included, I'll remove those and push a new version.
Thanks!

[jeffWelling]

I just tried running the specs and they all pass, but it's possible this is a problem without a spec.

[jeffWelling]

I think I understand what you mean now;
When you haven't pushed a ticgit/ticgit-ng branch to origin before then when you run sync, TicGit explodes violently.

I've started a new issue for this at #32 and will begin investigating.

[frioux]

That's right, glad you got it :-)

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 3:54 AM, jeffWelling
reply@reply.github.com
wrote:

I think I understand what you mean now;
When you haven't pushed a ticgit/ticgit-ng branch to origin before then when you run sync, TicGit explodes violently.  I've started a new issue for this at #32 and will begin investigating.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#11 (comment)

fREW Schmidt
http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com

[jeffWelling]

issue 32 is resolved in 1.0.2.9 :)

[frioux]

Great! And fyi I'm just using it straight out of the repo

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:03 AM, jeffWelling <
reply@reply.github.com>wrote:

issue 32 is resolved in 1.0.2.9 :)

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#11 (comment)

fREW Schmidt
http://blog.afoolishmanifesto.com