mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Bryan Turner <>
To: Git Users <>
Subject: HEAD and namespaces
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 19:59:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)

When using GIT_NAMESPACE, it appears the "symref" added to the
capabilities advertisement doesn't get the namespace stripped. The
namespace is stripped for the advertised refs, including "HEAD", but
not on the "symref".

Lafiel:test bturner$ GIT_NAMESPACE=foo GIT_TRACE_PACKET=1 git ls-remote origin
19:51:54.012696 pkt-line.c:80           packet:          git<
b9acca03606d4c674be8b7e79cd788cedbec957c HEAD\0multi_ack thin-pack
side-band side-band-64k ofs-delta shallow deepen-since deepen-not
deepen-relative no-progress include-tag multi_ack_detailed
19:51:54.013017 pkt-line.c:80           packet:          git<
b9acca03606d4c674be8b7e79cd788cedbec957c refs/heads/master
19:51:54.013028 pkt-line.c:80           packet:          git< 0000
19:51:54.013035 pkt-line.c:80           packet:          git> 0000
b9acca03606d4c674be8b7e79cd788cedbec957c HEAD
b9acca03606d4c674be8b7e79cd788cedbec957c refs/heads/master

I don't know whether the client somehow does some stripping on the
"symref" to decide that HEAD should be
"refs/namespaces/foo/refs/heads/master", but I'd assume not. Either
way, since the clone can't find the HEAD value (either because it
doesn't see "refs/namespaces/foo/HEAD" as HEAD, which I'd assume is
the case, or because it can't find
"refs/namespaces/foo/refs/heads/master"), it falls back on the old
behavior of picking the first branch with a matching commit. That
brings back all the "wrong branch" issues with cloning that adding
"symref"  fixed.

Is this a bug? An oversight? An intentional decision? How is HEAD
supposed to work when using GIT_NAMESPACE? Perhaps the expectation is
that namespaces won't have their own HEADs? I'd say perhaps it's that
even in the namespace the target ref shouldn't be namespaced, but that
doesn't seem like it could possibly be correct since the namespace
could contain refs that don't exist outside it, so Git would see the
symbolic ref as broken.

Any insight would be greatly appreciated!


             reply	other threads:[~2019-05-21  2:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-21  2:59 Bryan Turner [this message]
2019-05-21 21:46 ` HEAD and namespaces Jeff King
2019-05-22  4:31   ` [PATCH] upload-pack: strip namespace from symref data Jeff King
2019-05-22 10:33     ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2019-05-23  6:11       ` [PATCH v2] " Jeff King
2019-05-28 17:01         ` 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:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='' \ \ \

* 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

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).