From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Force-with-lease and new branches
Date: Sat, 7 May 2016 19:09:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160507180914.GR14612@serenity.lan> (raw)
I've noticed a slightly annoying behaviour of git-push's
--force-with-lease option around branch creation.
I'd like to be able to do:
git push --force-with-lease origin refs/heads/jk/*
to push out a load of topic branches safely in case I've switched client
machines and forgotten to pull, but for newly-created branches this
fails with "stale-info", which seems to be intentional via the
expect_old_no_trackback field in struct ref.
However, if I use the explicit --force-with-lease syntax with the null
hash then the push does succeed. I've added a couple of tests to t5533
which demonstrate this in a patch below - the first one fails but the
second passes.
It looks like this has been the case since the first version of what
would become --force-with-lease [1] and I can't find any discussion
around this particular behaviour in the three versions of that patch set
I found on Gmane [2], [3], [4].
So my questions are: what will break if we decide to treat "no remote
tracking branch" as "new branch" and is that a reasonable thing to do?
[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/229992
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/229430
[3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/230142
[4] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/231021
-- >8 --
diff --git a/t/t5533-push-cas.sh b/t/t5533-push-cas.sh
index c732012..ad9e06f 100755
--- a/t/t5533-push-cas.sh
+++ b/t/t5533-push-cas.sh
@@ -191,4 +191,28 @@ test_expect_success 'cover everything with default force-with-lease (allowed)' '
test_cmp expect actual
'
+test_expect_success 'new branch covered by force-with-lease' '
+ setup_srcdst_basic &&
+ (
+ cd dst &&
+ git branch branch master &&
+ git push --force-with-lease=branch origin branch
+ ) &&
+ git ls-remote dst refs/heads/branch >expect &&
+ git ls-remote src refs/heads/branch >actual &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+'
+
+test_expect_success 'new branch with explicit force-with-lease' '
+ setup_srcdst_basic &&
+ (
+ cd dst &&
+ git branch branch master &&
+ git push --force-with-lease=branch:0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 origin branch
+ ) &&
+ git ls-remote dst refs/heads/branch >expect &&
+ git ls-remote src refs/heads/branch >actual &&
+ test_cmp expect actual
+'
+
test_done
next reply other threads:[~2016-05-07 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-07 18:09 John Keeping [this message]
2016-05-08 18:29 ` Force-with-lease and new branches 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=20160507180914.GR14612@serenity.lan \
--to=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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).