> +wanted-refs section
> + * This section is only included if the client has requested a
> + ref using a 'want-ref' line and if a packfile section is also
> + included in the response.
> +
> + * Always begins with the section header "wanted-refs"
Add a period at the end to be consistent with the others.
> + * The server will send a ref listing (" ") for
> + each reference requested using 'want-ref' lines.
> +
> + * The server MUST NOT send any refs which were not requested
> + using 'want-ref' lines.
We might want tag following refs to be included here in the future, but
at that time, I think we can amend this to say that if include-tag-ref
is sent by the user, the server may send additional refs, otherwise the
server must not do so. So this is fine.
> +test_expect_success 'mix want and want-ref' '
> + cat >expected_refs <<-EOF &&
> + $(git rev-parse f) refs/heads/master
> + EOF
> + git rev-parse e f | sort >expected_commits &&
> +
> + test-pkt-line pack >in <<-EOF &&
> + command=fetch
> + 0001
> + no-progress
> + want-ref refs/heads/master
> + want $(git rev-parse e)
> + have $(git rev-parse a)
> + done
> +
> + EOF
> +
> + git serve --stateless-rpc >out + check_output
> +'
Overall the tests look good, although I might be a bit biased since they
are based on what I wrote a while ago [1]. I was wondering about the
behavior when the client mixes "want" and "want-ref" (as will happen if
they fetch both a ref by name and an exact SHA-1), and this test indeed
shows the expected behavior.
[1]
https://public-inbox.org/git/d0d42b3bb4cf755f122591e191354c53848f197d.1485381677.git.jonathanta...@google.com/
> +test_expect_success 'want-ref with ref we already have commit for' '
> + cat >expected_refs <<-EOF &&
> + $(git rev-parse c) refs/heads/o/foo
> + EOF
> + >expected_commits &&
> +
> + test-pkt-line pack >in <<-EOF &&
> + command=fetch
> + 0001
> + no-progress
> + want-ref refs/heads/o/foo
> + have $(git rev-parse c)
> + done
> +
> + EOF
> +
> + git serve --stateless-rpc >out + check_output
> +'
Likewise for this test - the ref is still reported, but the packfile
does not contain the requested object.
> struct upload_pack_data {
> struct object_array wants;
> + struct string_list wanted_refs;
Document here that this is a map from ref names to owned struct
object_id instances.
> +static int parse_want_ref(const char *line, struct string_list *wanted_refs)
> +{
> + const char *arg;
> + if (skip_prefix(line, "want-ref ", )) {
> + struct object_id oid;
> + struct string_list_item *item;
> + struct object *o;
> +
> + if (read_ref(arg, ))
> + die("unknown ref %s", arg);
> +
> + item = string_list_append(wanted_refs, arg);
> + item->util = oiddup();
> +
> + o = parse_object_or_die(, arg);
> + if (!(o->flags & WANTED)) {
> + o->flags |= WANTED;
> + add_object_array(o, NULL, _obj);
> + }
Makes sense - besides adding it to wanted_refs, this adds the object to
want_obj, just like how the other code paths for "want" adds it.
> +static void send_wanted_ref_info(struct upload_pack_data *data)
> +{
> + const struct string_list_item *item;
> +
> + if (!data->wanted_refs.nr)
> + return;
> +
> + packet_write_fmt(1, "wanted-refs\n");
> +
> + for_each_string_list_item(item, >wanted_refs) {
> + packet_write_fmt(1, "%s %s\n",
> + oid_to_hex(item->util),
> + item->string);
> + }
> +
> + packet_delim(1);
> +}
The documentation states that the "wanted-refs" section is only sent if
there is at least one "want-ref" from the client, and each "want-ref"
causes one entry to be added to data->wanted_refs, so this is correct.
Thanks - besides adding the period in the documentation, this patch
looks good to me.
