From: Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com>,
Angelo Borsotti <angelo.borsotti@gmail.com>,
Drew Northup <n1xim.email@gmail.com>,
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>,
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>,
Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>,
Kacper Kornet <draenog@pld-linux.org>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: [PATCH] push: cleanup push rules comment
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 23:18:53 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1354079933-2488-1-git-send-email-chris@rorvick.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7v7gp7nf5e.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
---
I ended up rewriting most of the comment. The new version removes
inter-rule dependencies (e.g., rule 5 overrides rule 3) which I think
makes it more readable.
This patch applies on top of the latest patch series regarding
pushing tags. If will include this in a re-roll of that series if
these changes are deemed a good idea.
Also, I hand-edited the patch so that the changes were not interleaved
to make it much easier to read. Can this be done automatically?
Something like a minimum # of matching lines required between
differences?
Chris
remote.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
index ee0c1e5..3fb1068 100644
--- a/remote.c
+++ b/remote.c
@@ -1319,27 +1319,29 @@ void set_ref_status_for_push(struct ref *remote_refs, int send_mirror,
continue;
}
- /* This part determines what can overwrite what.
- * The rules are:
- *
- * (0) you can always use --force or +A:B notation to
- * selectively force individual ref pairs.
- *
- * (1) if the old thing does not exist, it is OK.
- *
- * (2) if the destination is under refs/tags/ you are
- * not allowed to overwrite it; tags are expected
- * to be static once created
- *
- * (3) if you do not have the old thing, you are not allowed
- * to overwrite it; you would not know what you are losing
- * otherwise.
- *
- * (4) if old is a commit and new is a descendant of old
- * (implying new is commit-ish), it is OK.
- *
- * (5) regardless of all of the above, removing :B is
- * always allowed.
+ /*
+ * The below logic determines whether an individual
+ * refspec A:B can be pushed. The push will succeed
+ * if any of the following are true:
+ *
+ * (1) the remote reference B does not exist
+ *
+ * (2) the remote reference B is being removed (i.e.
+ * pushing :B where no source is specified)
+ *
+ * (3) the update meets all fast-forwarding criteria:
+ *
+ * (a) the destination is not under refs/tags/
+ * (b) the old is a commit
+ * (c) the new is a descendant of the old
+ *
+ * NOTE: We must actually have the old object in
+ * order to overwrite it in the remote reference,
+ * and that the new object must be commit-ish.
+ * These are implied by (b) and (c) respectively.
+ *
+ * (4) it is forced using the +A:B notation, or by
+ * passing the --force argument
*/
ref->not_forwardable = !is_forwardable(ref);
--
1.8.0.209.gf3828dc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-28 5:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-23 4:21 [PATCH v5 0/7] push: update remote tags only with force Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 1/7] push: return reject reasons via a mask Chris Rorvick
2012-11-26 18:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-11-27 3:00 ` Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 2/7] push: add advice for rejected tag reference Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 3/7] push: flag updates Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 4/7] push: flag updates that require force Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 5/7] push: require force for refs under refs/tags/ Chris Rorvick
2012-11-26 18:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-11-27 4:17 ` Chris Rorvick
2012-11-27 17:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-11-28 5:18 ` Chris Rorvick [this message]
2012-11-28 16:58 ` [PATCH] push: cleanup push rules comment Junio C Hamano
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 6/7] push: require force for annotated tags Chris Rorvick
2012-11-23 4:21 ` [PATCH 7/7] push: clarify rejection of update to non-commit-ish Chris Rorvick
2012-11-26 18:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-11-27 3:52 ` Chris Rorvick
2012-11-27 17:11 ` Junio C Hamano
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=1354079933-2488-1-git-send-email-chris@rorvick.com \
--to=chris@rorvick.com \
--cc=angelo.borsotti@gmail.com \
--cc=draenog@pld-linux.org \
--cc=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=n1xim.email@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=philipoakley@iee.org \
/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).