list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <>
Cc: Jacob Keller <>,
	Jeff King <>, Jacob Keller <>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/1] refspec: add support for negative refspecs
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:21:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <> (Jacob Keller's message of "Fri, 21 Aug 2020 14:52:47 -0700")

Jacob Keller <> writes:

> From: Jacob Keller <>
> Both fetch and push support pattern refspecs which allow fetching or
> pushing references that match a specific pattern. Because these patterns
> are globs, they have somewhat limited ability to express more complex
> situations.
> For example, suppose you wish to fetch all branches from a remote except
> for a specific one. To allow this, you must setup a set of refspecs
> which match only the branches you want. Because refspecs are either
> explicit name matches, or simple globs, many patterns cannot be
> expressed.
> Add support for a new type of refspec, referred to as "negative"
> refspecs. These are prefixed with a '^' and mean "exclude any ref
> matching this refspec". They can only have one "side" which always
> refers to the source. During a fetch, this refers to the name of the ref
> on the remote. During a push, this refers to the name of the ref on the
> local side.
> With negative refspecs, users can express more complex patterns. For
> example:
>  git fetch origin refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* ^refs/heads/dontwant
> will fetch all branches on origin into remotes/origin, but will exclude
> fetching the branch named dontwant.
> Refspecs today are commutative, meaning that order doesn't expressly
> matter. Rather than forcing an implied order, negative refspecs will
> always be applied last. That is, in order to match, a ref must match at
> least one positive refspec, and match none of the negative refspecs.
> This is similar to how negative pathspecs work.
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <>
> ---
> I realize this probably needs to be broken down into multiple patches, but I
> haven't quite figured out the best way to do that. I'd like to avoid the
> case where a commit has support for parsing negative refspecs but code paths
> which use refspecs aren't handling them correctly. Thoughts?
> Splitting would also allow additional space for explanations of some of the
> trickier logic.
> I am also definitely looking for more test ideas, to help make sure we
> cover a good variety of the flows.

Anybody wants to help this move forward?

I plan to send a review with the patch in the current form, without
waiting for any splitting, later towards the weekend, though.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-09-17 20:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-21 21:52 [RFC v2 0/1] implement " Jacob Keller
2020-08-21 21:52 ` [RFC v2 1/1] refspec: add " Jacob Keller
2020-08-22 13:29   ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-08-24 15:47     ` Jacob Keller
2020-08-24 17:55     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-24 19:26       ` Jacob Keller
2020-09-17 20:21   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2020-09-18  0:01   ` Junio C Hamano
2020-09-24 23:33     ` Jacob Keller
2020-09-24 23:42     ` Jacob Keller

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 \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [RFC v2 1/1] refspec: add support for negative refspecs' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this 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).