From: Cornelius Weig <cornelius.weig@tngtech.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: gitster@pobox.com, git@vger.kernel.org, novalis@novalis.org,
pclouds@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 15:06:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4faf836a-40b6-da9a-877a-3b2ce7c863df@tngtech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170126033547.7bszipvkpi2jb4ad@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Hi Peff,
thanks for your thoughts.
> I tried to read this patch with fresh eyes. But given the history, you
> may take my review with a grain of salt. :)
Does it mean another reviewer is needed?
> I don't think my original had tests for this, but it might be worth
> adding a test for this last bit (i.e., that an update of ORIG_HEAD does
> not write a reflog when logallrefupdates is set to "always").
Good point. I blindly copied your commit message without thinking too
much about it.
> I guess the backtick fixups came from my original. It might be easier to
> see the change if they were pulled into their own patch, but it's
> probably not that big a deal.
If it's best practice to break out such changes, I'll revise it.
>> @@ -2835,8 +2835,8 @@ static int log_ref_write_1(const char *refname, const unsigned char *old_sha1,
>> {
>> int logfd, result, oflags = O_APPEND | O_WRONLY;
>>
>> - if (log_all_ref_updates < 0)
>> - log_all_ref_updates = !is_bare_repository();
>> + if (log_all_ref_updates == LOG_REFS_UNSET)
>> + log_all_ref_updates = is_bare_repository() ? LOG_REFS_NONE : LOG_REFS_NORMAL;
>
> This hunk is new, I think. The enum values are set in such a way that
> the original code would have continued to work, but I think using the
> symbolic names is an improvement.
Yes it's new.
> I assume you grepped for log_all_ref_updates to find this. I see only
> one spot that now doesn't use the symbolic names. In builtin/checkout.c,
> update_refs_for_switch() checks:
>
> if (opts->new_branch_log && !log_all_ref_updates)
>
> That looks buggy, as it would treat LOG_REFS_NORMAL and LOG_REFS_UNSET
> the same, and I do not see us resolving the UNSET case to a true/false
> value. But I don't think the bug is new in your patch; the default value
> was "-1" already.
>
> I doubt it can be triggered in practice, because either:
>
> - the config value is set in the config file, and we pick up that
> value, whether it's "true" or "false"
>
> - it's unset, in which case our default would be to enable reflogs in
> a non-bare repo. And since git-checkout would refuse to run in a
> bare repo, we must be non-bare, and thus enabling reflogs does the
> right thing.
That far I can follow.
> But it works quite by accident. I wonder if we should this
> "is_bare_repository" check into a function that can be called instead of
> accessing log_all_ref_updates() directly.
Are you saying that we should move the `!log_all_ref_updates` check into
its own function where we should also check `is_bare_repository`? I
don't see that this would win much, because as you said: checkouts in a
bare repo are forbidden anyway.
Other than that, I guess it should better read `log_all_ref_update !=
LOG_REFS_NONE` instead of `!log_all_ref_updates`.
>> +test_expect_success 'update-ref does not create reflog with --no-create-reflog if core.logAllRefUpdates=always' '
>
> This test title is _really_ long, and will wrap in the output on
> reasonable-sized terminals. Maybe '--no-create-reflog overrides
> core.logAllRefUpdates=always' would be shorter?
Yes, I agree.
>> +test_expect_success 'stdin does not create reflog when core.logAllRefUpdates=true' '
>
> I don't mind these extra stdin tests, but IMHO they are just redundant.
> The "--stdin --create-reflog" one makes sure the option is propagated
> down via the --stdin machinery. But we know the config option is handled
> at a low level anyway.
>
> I guess it depends on how black-box we want the testing to be. It just
> seems unlikely for a regression to be found here and not in the tests
> above.
Since these other stdin tests were around, I added this variant. But
you're right: this test breaks along with the other and doesn't add add
more safety. I'll remove it.
However, I realized that I have not written tests about ref updates in a
bare repository. Do you think it's worthwile?
Cheers,
Cornelius
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-26 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-25 0:19 [PATCH] tag: add tag.createReflog option cornelius.weig
2017-01-25 5:06 ` Pranit Bauva
2017-01-25 18:00 ` Jeff King
2017-01-25 18:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-25 21:21 ` Cornelius Weig
2017-01-25 21:33 ` Jeff King
2017-01-25 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-25 22:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-25 23:40 ` Cornelius Weig
2017-01-26 1:16 ` [PATCH] refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always cornelius.weig
2017-01-26 1:16 ` cornelius.weig
2017-01-26 3:35 ` Jeff King
2017-01-26 14:06 ` Cornelius Weig [this message]
2017-01-26 14:46 ` Jeff King
2017-01-26 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] config: add markup to core.logAllRefUpdates doc cornelius.weig
2017-01-26 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always cornelius.weig
2017-01-26 23:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-26 22:31 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] update-ref: add test cases for bare repository cornelius.weig
2017-01-26 23:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-26 23:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] config: add markup to core.logAllRefUpdates doc Junio C Hamano
2017-01-27 10:09 ` [PATCH v3 " cornelius.weig
2017-01-27 10:09 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] refs: add option core.logAllRefUpdates = always cornelius.weig
2017-01-30 21:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-30 22:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-31 13:16 ` Cornelius Weig
2017-01-31 17:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-30 23:37 ` Jeff King
2017-01-31 14:00 ` Cornelius Weig
2017-01-31 18:21 ` Jeff King
2017-01-31 17:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-31 20:28 ` Cornelius Weig
2017-01-31 22:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-01-27 10:09 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] update-ref: add test cases for bare repository cornelius.weig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4faf836a-40b6-da9a-877a-3b2ce7c863df@tngtech.com \
--to=cornelius.weig@tngtech.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=novalis@novalis.org \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).