Yup - GitHub will pick up references to SHAs and users/repos patterns using the [GitHub Flavored Markdown][1]

Specifically about linking to commits:

&gt; A bit of the GitHub spice
&gt;
&gt; In addition to the changes in the previous section, certain references are auto-linked:
&gt;
&gt; * SHA: be6a8cc1c1ecfe9489fb51e4869af15a13fc2cd2
&gt; * User@SHA ref: mojombo@be6a8cc1c1ecfe9489fb51e4869af15a13fc2cd2
&gt; * User/Project@SHA: mojombo/god@be6a8cc1c1ecfe9489fb51e4869af15a13fc2cd2
&gt; * \#Num: #1
&gt; * User/#Num: mojombo#1
&gt; * User/Project#Num: mojombo/god#1

  [1]: https://docs.github.com/en/github/writing-on-github/autolinked-references-and-urls#commit-shas

Guys at git answers the question [this way](https://git-scm.com/docs/SubmittingPatches#describe-changes):

&gt;  If you want to reference a previous commit in the history of a stable branch, use the format &quot;abbreviated hash (subject, date)&quot;, like this:
&gt;
&gt;	  Commit f86a374 (pack-bitmap.c: fix a memleak, 2015-03-30)
&gt;	  noticed that ...
&gt;
&gt;The &quot;Copy commit summary&quot; command of gitk can be used to obtain this format (with the subject enclosed in a pair of double-quotes), or this invocation of git show:
&gt;
&gt;	  git show -s --pretty=reference &lt;commit&gt;
&gt;
&gt; or, on an older version of Git without support for --pretty=reference:
&gt;
&gt;	  git show -s --date=short --pretty=&#39;format:%h (%s, %ad)&#39; &lt;commit&gt;



Should be a simple question, but I&#39;m unable to find an answer anywhere. The `~` operator in python is a documented as a bitwise inversion operator.  Fine. I have noticed seemingly schizophrenic behavior though, to wit:

    ~True -&gt; -2
    ~1 -&gt; -2
    ~False -&gt; -1
    ~0 -&gt; -1
    ~numpy.array([True,False],dtype=int) -&gt; array([-2,-1])
    ~numpy.array([True,False],dtype=bool) -&gt; array([False,True])

In the first 4 examples, I can see that python is implementing (as documented) `~x = -(x+1)`, with the input treated as an int *even if it&#39;s boolean*. Hence, for a scalar boolean, `~` is not treated as a logical negation. Not that the behavior is identical on a numpy array defined with boolean values by with an int type.

Why does `~` then work as a logical negation operator on a boolean array (Also notice: `~numpy.isfinite(numpy.inf) -&gt; True`?)?

It is extremely annoying that I must use `not()` on a scalar, but `not()` won&#39;t work to negate an array. Then for an array, I must use `~`, but `~` won&#39;t work to negate a scalar...

python tilde unary operator as negation numpy bool array

I think it should be a very simple problem, but I cannot find a solution or an effective keyword for search.

I just have this image.

![the original image][1]

The black edges are useless so that I want to cut them, only leaving the Windows icon (and the blue background).

I do not want to calculate the coordinate and the size of the Windows icon.  GIMP and Photoshop have sort of autocrop function. OpenCV does not have one?


  [1]: http://i.stack.imgur.com/BSBL9.png

Crop black edges with OpenCV

Is there a convention for referring to a previous commit in a git commit message?

Example commit message:

    Fixed bug such and such introduced in a1b2c3e4

In particular, is there a convention that github.com will understand, and convert to a link?



How to refer to a previous commit in git commit message

Is there a convention for referring to a previous commit in a git commit message?
Example commit message:
<pre><code class="hljs language-scss">Fixed bug such and such introduced in a1b2c3e4
</code></pre>
In particular, is there a convention that github.com will understand, and convert to a link?

I want to push a branch (not the current) without having to check it out first, how can I achieve that ?


this is how I&#39;d do:

    #currently in master
    git checkout feature
    git push origin feature
    git checkout master

but checking out feature can cause conflicts, can&#39;t I just push another branch than the current one ?

push an &#39;unchecked out&#39; branch

We have a workflow requirement that essentially mean that we need to have the artifact version of a module externally defined from the current branch in git.

I.e. if we are on the master branch in git, I need `&lt;version&gt;master-...&lt;/version&gt;` and if we are on the bugfixX branch, I need `&lt;version&gt;bugfixX-....&lt;/version&gt;` for the generated artifact for this pom.xml.

I have previously found that https://github.com/koraktor/mavanagaiata can provide the SHA-1 hash as a property and it appears from the documentation that it can also provide the branch, so perhaps if it could be run early enough in the process we could set the property and just put `&lt;version&gt;${our.version}&lt;/version&gt;` in the pom.  If this is possible, I would very much like to see a working pom.xml (and reward a 500 point bounty for it too).

If not, I guess we are into either preprocessing or &quot;git checkout&quot; do extra magic with some of the hooks (which I have not yet tried, working code would be great too).

We have a top level pom, which can be run to generate a property file in &quot;..&quot; before building the modules where this functionality I&#39;m asking about needs to go.

Any suggestions on how to solve this?  


Deriving maven artifact version from git branch

Let&#39;s assume I `merge` git and there is a merge conflict.

My question is: how can I force git to always choose the newer version of code in conflict so I won&#39;t need to resolve the conflict by hand?

Force Git to always choose the newer version during a merge?

I am a WordPress Designer/Developer, who is getting more and more heavily involved with using version control, notably Git, though I do use SVN for some projects. I am currently using Beanstalk for my remote repo.

Adding all of the WordPress files to my repo is no problem, if I wanted to I know I could .gitignore the wp-config file, but since I&#39;m the only developer, currently, and these projects are closed source, it really makes little sense.

WordPress relies heavily on the database, as any CMS does, to keep textual content, and many settings depending on the specific plugin/theme configuration I&#39;m using. I&#39;m wondering what the best way of using version control on the database would be, if it&#39;s even possible. I guess I could do a SQL dump, though my MySQL server is running on Windows (read as: I don&#39;t know how to do it), and then add the SQL dump to my repository. But when I push something live, that poses huge security threats.

Is there an accepted practice of doing this?

Using version control (Git) on a MySQL database

How to create patch suitable for reviewing in crucible?

    git diff branch master --no-prefix &gt; patch

This generates only 3 lines of context. So I do the following

    git diff --unified=2000 branch master --no-prefix &gt; patch

Hopefully all files will have less than 2000 lines. Is there a way to tell git to include all the lines in the file for patch without having to specify maximum lines?

How to get git diff with full context?

GitHub search allows filtering repositories by language. How can I set a repository to a specific language? 





How can I change the language of a repository on GitHub?

Using the GitHub Windows client I did a *sync* to pull remote changes to my local machine, but before finishing the sync, I ran out of disk space and the sync failed.  Now I seem to have a bunch of local changes that are actually changes that were being pulled from origin.  I tried to run git pull but got:

	C:\Users\Tom\SourceLog [master +4 ~26 -0 !]&gt; git pull
	Updating b3a86e1..5afd74f
	error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by merge:
			SourceLog.Interface/IChangedFile.cs
			SourceLog.Interface/ILogEntry.cs
			...
	Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can merge.
	error: The following untracked working tree files would be overwritten by merge:
			Lib/MSBuildExtensionPack/4.0.6.0/Ionic.Zip.dll
			Lib/MSBuildExtensionPack/4.0.6.0/MSBuild.ExtensionPack.dll
			...
	Aborting

So now I&#39;m trying to discard the local changes but I&#39;m getting:

	C:\Users\Tom\SourceLog [master +4 ~26 -0 !]&gt; git checkout -- .
	Rename from &#39;.git/index.lock&#39; to &#39;.git/index&#39; failed. Should I try again? (y/n) y
	Rename from &#39;.git/index.lock&#39; to &#39;.git/index&#39; failed. Should I try again? (y/n) n
	fatal: unable to write new index file

How can I clean this up?  (I didn&#39;t have any local changes before starting the sync.)


Update
------

Can&#39;t seem to reset head..

	C:\Users\Tom\SourceLog [master +4 ~0 -0 !]&gt; git reset head
	Rename from &#39;.git/index.lock&#39; to &#39;.git/index&#39; failed. Should I try again? (y/n) y
	Rename from &#39;.git/index.lock&#39; to &#39;.git/index&#39; failed. Should I try again? (y/n) n
	error: Could not write new index file.
	fatal: Could not reset index file to revision &#39;head&#39;.

Git rename from index.lock to index failed

I want to download a .zip with the source of a library hosted on github, but I don&#39;t want the master, because every time I download I could be downloading a different version.

This particular library does not have tags, so I can&#39;t use that.

So how do I download the source.zip for a specific commit sha?

How to download .zip from GitHub for a particular commit sha?

We are a team of 60+ developers working on the same product and are moving from SVN to Git and GitHub. We have a process in SVN where in individual files are locked and whenever a developer wants to commit code, he needs to get it unlocked by the owner of the file. Three of us are the owners of the total 150+ files. The unlocking is preceded by a code review. 

In Github, we are planning to use the Fork-Clone model - each project a group of dev is working on will do a fork, each developer will do a clone of the fork, write the code &amp; commit to origin, the lead of the feature will do a pull request to upstream.

Though this seems fine, the problem is when a big project gets delivered, it brings in lots of changes for review and hence, increases the load for the file owners. Also, this might happen in the later cycles of development and hence the project might be jeopardized.

One method we thought might work is to have hooks when the git push is done to the origin (fork). There can be one final review git pull to upstream. 

However, we could not find any github extensions or push hooks for the same. Is there a quick way (read, existing extension) to do this with Github or should we use the same hooks that we would use with git?

Is there a way to lock individual files or directories on fork when using git?

Is it possible to use GitHub for Windows for both Bitbucket and GitHub at once? 

For example, can I have repo on both sites show up in the program, and when I commit/synch a repo, it push to the respective repo on the respective website?

Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	Joel	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Git	Michael Shimmins	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Git	Vser	View Answer on Stackoverflow

How to refer to a previous commit in git commit message

Git Problem Overview

Git Solutions

Solution 1 - Git

Solution 2 - Git

Crop black edges with OpenCV

python tilde unary operator as negation numpy bool array

Attributions