Comments for The Robb Report http://www.weblaws.org/robb Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:15:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on About Me by Your momma http://www.weblaws.org/robb/about/comment-page-1/#comment-3644 Your momma Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:15:58 +0000 #comment-3644 Where the hell have you been? We have to catch up! Congrats on finishing your degree! Find me on Facebook or email me and we can get a drink. I would love to hear what you are up to. A- Where the hell have you been? We have to catch up! Congrats on finishing your degree! Find me on Facebook or email me and we can get a drink. I would love to hear what you are up to.
A-

]]> Comment on Occupy PDX: A Second Look by Mort Shecter http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2011/10/19/occupy-pdx-another-look/comment-page-1/#comment-3212 Mort Shecter Fri, 16 Dec 2011 22:59:05 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=1157#comment-3212 Very well done Robb. You certainly captured the spirit of this event. Mort Very well done Robb. You certainly captured the spirit of this event.

Mort

]]> Comment on About Me by App Review: Quisitive, Finding a great company name on the go on your iPhone | Justia Law, Technology & Legal Marketing Blog http://www.weblaws.org/robb/about/comment-page-1/#comment-2393 App Review: Quisitive, Finding a great company name on the go on your iPhone | Justia Law, Technology & Legal Marketing Blog Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:45:54 +0000 #comment-2393 [...] been impressed with the work of Robb Shector on OregonLaws.org and WebLaws.org. Now, he’s made excellent use of the trademark data to [...] [...] been impressed with the work of Robb Shector on OregonLaws.org and WebLaws.org. Now, he’s made excellent use of the trademark data to [...]

]]> Comment on About Me by New from Robb Shecter: Quisitive App for U.S. Trademark Search « Legal Informatics Blog http://www.weblaws.org/robb/about/comment-page-1/#comment-2320 New from Robb Shecter: Quisitive App for U.S. Trademark Search « Legal Informatics Blog Fri, 26 Aug 2011 21:43:35 +0000 #comment-2320 [...] Robb Shecter, J.D., creator of OregonLaws.org and WebLaws.org, has released Quisitive, a new iPhone/iPad app that enables searches for U.S. trademarks, as well as research into trade names, branding, and U.S. trademark and copyright law. [...] [...] Robb Shecter, J.D., creator of OregonLaws.org and WebLaws.org, has released Quisitive, a new iPhone/iPad app that enables searches for U.S. trademarks, as well as research into trade names, branding, and U.S. trademark and copyright law. [...]

]]> Comment on Yeah, right. “I bookmarked the website with hopes to read more!” by Manu http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2010/10/21/yeah-right-bookmarked-the-website-with-hopes-to-read-more/comment-page-1/#comment-2258 Manu Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:32:31 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=776#comment-2258 Hi, I was going through some old spam comments (non published) as I've set up a page where I publish comments that are indeed spam-comments, or spamments. I have received exactly the same comment on the same date and from the same IP. My guess is these comments try to test if comments are moderated, if the comment is published right after being posted then you know... . Hi,

I was going through some old spam comments (non published) as I’ve set up a page where I publish comments that are indeed spam-comments, or spamments.

I have received exactly the same comment on the same date and from the same IP.

My guess is these comments try to test if comments are moderated, if the comment is published right after being posted then you know… .

]]> Comment on Ethics in the cafe: what’s the purpose of the condiment bar? by Risa http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2008/08/15/ethics-in-the-cafe-whats-a-reasonable-expectation/comment-page-1/#comment-1551 Risa Mon, 07 Mar 2011 06:50:32 +0000 http://greenfabric.com/robb/?p=50#comment-1551 You make it sound like people are trying to be malicious. It's not like that. People are like, "Here's a loophole --- I found it; I can save money. Why wouldn't I save money?" But isn't this what capitalism is all about? I.e., if you can save money here and here, that's more for you later. You make it sound like people are trying to be malicious. It’s not like that. People are like, “Here’s a loophole — I found it; I can save money. Why wouldn’t I save money?”

But isn’t this what capitalism is all about? I.e., if you can save money here and here, that’s more for you later.

]]> Comment on That one little confusing thing about the Git version control system by Eric http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2011/02/02/that-one-little-confusing-thing-about-the-git-version-control-system/comment-page-1/#comment-1370 Eric Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:35:05 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=989#comment-1370 When you perform a "git pull" behind the scenes it is doing a fetch + a merge to complete the action, this is why you see errors regarding merges sometimes when performing a pull. When you perform a “git pull” behind the scenes it is doing a fetch + a merge to complete the action, this is why you see errors regarding merges sometimes when performing a pull.

]]> Comment on That one little confusing thing about the Git version control system by Josh http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2011/02/02/that-one-little-confusing-thing-about-the-git-version-control-system/comment-page-1/#comment-1369 Josh Thu, 03 Feb 2011 04:18:20 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=989#comment-1369 git branch --set-upstream newlayout origin/newlayout is what you want to make git pull work properly. See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/520650/how-do-you-make-an-existing-git-branch-track-a-remote-branch. git branch –set-upstream newlayout origin/newlayout

is what you want to make git pull work properly. See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/520650/how-do-you-make-an-existing-git-branch-track-a-remote-branch.

]]> Comment on That one little confusing thing about the Git version control system by Adam Hitchcock http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2011/02/02/that-one-little-confusing-thing-about-the-git-version-control-system/comment-page-1/#comment-1368 Adam Hitchcock Thu, 03 Feb 2011 02:50:08 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=989#comment-1368 bull can easily be over ridden to do rebasing instead of merging [branch] autosetuprebase = always bull can easily be over ridden to do rebasing instead of merging

[branch]
autosetuprebase = always

]]> Comment on That one little confusing thing about the Git version control system by Chris Murphy http://www.weblaws.org/robb/2011/02/02/that-one-little-confusing-thing-about-the-git-version-control-system/comment-page-1/#comment-1367 Chris Murphy Thu, 03 Feb 2011 02:39:35 +0000 http://www.weblaws.org/robb/?p=989#comment-1367 1) The refspec is the path that you've given git (explicitly or, more likely, implicitly via another command) for this repo. It tells git what branches you want to pull. 2) the nickname is the alias for the repository. You've probably set up "origin" to be the nickname for your remote repository. 3) in Git, a pull is effectively an alias for fetch and merge. That's why you're getting merge-speak. Adding all of this up, Git is complaining because you're not telling it what branch you want to pull (fetch and merge). Imagine you're on branch feature1, and you say git pull. Git pull what? git pull origin master? git pull other-remote other-branch? So you need to tell git: git pull origin feature1 Now, back to your refspec. The reason git was blathering about that is because you can set up your refspec to tell git what git pull means by default. It could be handy to do this for branches you're pulling a lot- like the master branch of the origin repository. Unfortunately, I think you're dead on with your criticism of the docs. More specifically, I think the docs are wonderful, but the terminology is confusing. Stick with it, it's worth your time :) 1) The refspec is the path that you’ve given git (explicitly or, more likely, implicitly via another command) for this repo. It tells git what branches you want to pull.
2) the nickname is the alias for the repository. You’ve probably set up “origin” to be the nickname for your remote repository.
3) in Git, a pull is effectively an alias for fetch and merge. That’s why you’re getting merge-speak.

Adding all of this up, Git is complaining because you’re not telling it what branch you want to pull (fetch and merge). Imagine you’re on branch feature1, and you say git pull. Git pull what? git pull origin master? git pull other-remote other-branch?
So you need to tell git: git pull origin feature1

Now, back to your refspec. The reason git was blathering about that is because you can set up your refspec to tell git what git pull means by default. It could be handy to do this for branches you’re pulling a lot- like the master branch of the origin repository.

Unfortunately, I think you’re dead on with your criticism of the docs. More specifically, I think the docs are wonderful, but the terminology is confusing.

Stick with it, it’s worth your time :)

]]>