From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 796A11F453 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 11:04:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726453AbeJOSsu (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:48:50 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com ([209.85.167.193]:43114 "EHLO mail-oi1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726400AbeJOSsu (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:48:50 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id s69-v6so14689748oie.10 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 04:04:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=diamand.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=vBcwSgrUAAoepLPRv4jJmzeO0RwwTkFJ2UyHrnp7wlc=; b=PBrwj1UQLSq9BYomMBhMeO3yrvVeEituO39J04i8dqdyvRUd7MEOWB9oAZCiFSiO6F XbtBxRK/HiCaiNnSdHDzd+Y9f/ua4XuRY5f+0oi6e/e4mTTpSdDJHT0+2/+kXZM2ECgE WZkSmb+kkVY84zAi5lGLtkVqk/4fdU68q4l7Q= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vBcwSgrUAAoepLPRv4jJmzeO0RwwTkFJ2UyHrnp7wlc=; b=DfmnxkxL6ZDjDIKBRGM6e4ICsgxsO05B57y284o4dlbZbwVdhrWtLjbq/PHw+C5RQk 7Isml3JNbA2vNDIE5I4kOmH8kmEfJrZwOWV0JmmIMvhbb5V/ukYfg61bHLoBlj2mY1h/ mEHyPdjrdm9BfTWQ7ezfFZjR2Xoz9J3qyEz1wMluNlFL0ObsQSya+eYKtZsHAJ3Ih3Au 3wShRYspuV2xVJdE/FTfMtBURcQB0GZlN2OfGKJIqlihaOpReL/IjAMjft6/CWc0tKKr LW7VxGSHdUJ2XCEeoa9G+Glw3QdUQGM3vyHfG23qgtO28kzblsC7JSULpJgP/gC0mBXX sqWw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfojwWES8jGBNZ3/fiYH0isv0QNZtaG3Atf7xUJF40PZN9pBE4dOY FBEqWyIEkYQDWOxigG5tXfhPgAAHFIMEZFvdNO4cOQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV627nWkyXfwe+wEsqI4RMdEtAWeRVlpu8fkBuBFoq5USekuGhmCimWfmIHYT5cTcJ64CW3t2VrQycpacAxkhcXM= X-Received: by 2002:aca:2d90:: with SMTP id t138-v6mr8326584oit.217.1539601444226; Mon, 15 Oct 2018 04:04:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181012052833.6945-1-luke@diamand.org> <20181012052833.6945-3-luke@diamand.org> In-Reply-To: From: Luke Diamand Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 12:03:52 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHv1 2/3] git-p4: unshelve into refs/remotes/p4-unshelved, not refs/remotes/p4/unshelved To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git Users , =?UTF-8?Q?SZEDER_G=C3=A1bor?= , Chen Bin , Miguel Torroja , George Vanburgh , Merland Romain , Vinicius Kursancew , Lars Schneider , Lex Spoon Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 19:19, Luke Diamand wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 14:45, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > Luke Diamand writes: > > > > > The branch detection code looks for branches under refs/remotes/p4/... > > > and can end up getting confused if there are unshelved changes in > > > there as well. This happens in the function p4BranchesInGit(). > > > > > > Instead, put the unshelved changes into refs/remotes/p4-unshelved/. > > > > I am not a p4 user (and not a git-p4 user), so it is a bit hard for > > me to assess if this is a backward incompatibile change and if so > > how serious potential breakage to existing users would be. > > I don't think it's a particularly serious breakage - it reports the > branch it unshelves to, so it should be fairly obvious. > > However, maybe it would make sense to pull this into a separate commit > to make it more obvious? I should have thought of that before > submitting. > > > > > > > > > -If the target branch in refs/remotes/p4/unshelved already exists, the old one will > > > +If the target branch in refs/remotes/p4-unshelved already exists, the old one will > > > be renamed. > > > > > > ---- > > > $ git p4 sync > > > $ git p4 unshelve 12345 > > > -$ git show refs/remotes/p4/unshelved/12345 > > > +$ git show p4/unshelved/12345 > > > > Isn't this "p4-unshelved/12345" now? > > Yes, I think another reason to pull into a separate commit. D'oh. It's already in a separate commit. I'll re-roll fixing that documentation. I think it will be fine to change the branch that the unshelving happens into - I think it's very unlikely anyone is basing some automated scripts on this, because of the way that unshelving is used anyway. Luke