Re: [PATCH v6] tracking branches: add advice to ambiguous refspec error

[Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> "Tao Klerks via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>  	if (!remote_find_tracking(remote, &tracking->spec)) {
>> -		if (++tracking->matches == 1) {
>> +		switch (++tracking->matches) {
>> +		case 1:
>>  			string_list_append(tracking->srcs, tracking->spec.src);
>>  			tracking->remote = remote->name;
>> -		} else {
>> +			break;
>> +		case 2:
>> +			/* there are at least two remotes; backfill the first one */
>> +			string_list_append(&ftb->ambiguous_remotes, tracking->spec.src);
>> +			/* fall through */
>> +		default:
>> +			string_list_append(&ftb->ambiguous_remotes, remote->name);
>>  			free(tracking->spec.src);
>>  			string_list_clear(tracking->srcs, 0);
>> +		break;
>
> Just to sanity check this part,
>
>  - During the first iteration, we append tracking->spec.src to
>    tracking->srcs, and set tracking->remote to remote->name;
>
>  - In later iterations, we do not want to touch tracking->srcs, and
>    want to collect remote->name.
>
> And "backfill" assumes that tracking->spec.src at that point in the
> second iteration is the same as what we got in remote->name in the
> first round.  If that were a correct assumption, then it is curious
> that the first iteration uses tracking->spec.src and remote->name
> separately for different purposes, which makes me want to double
> check if the assumption is indeed correct.
>
> If it were tracking->remote (which was assigned the value of
> remote->name during the first iteration) that is used to backfill
> before we append remote->name in the second iteration, I wouldn't
> find it "curious", but the use of tracking->spec.src there makes me
> feel confused.
>
> Thanks.

Thanks for bringing this up, I also found this unusual when I was
reading v5.