Re: BUG: git request-pull broken for plain branches
Hi Junio, On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:41:23PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de writes: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 05:05:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de wrote: $ git rev-parse HEAD 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 $ git ls-remote origin | grep 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 refs/heads/ukl/for-mainline $ git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD /dev/null warn: No match for commit 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 found at origin warn: Are you sure you pushed 'HEAD' there? Notice how HEAD does not match. The error message is perhaps misleading. It's not enough to match the commit. You need to match the branch name too. git used to guess the branch name (from the commit), and it often guessed wrongly. So now they need to match. So you should do git request-pull origin/master origin ukl/for-mainline to let request-pull know that you're requesting a pull for ukl/for-mainline. Or git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD:ukl/for-mainline I am not Linus, and do not speak for him, but FWIW here are some comments on the ideas. I liked git guessing the branch name, maybe we can teach it to guess a bit better than it did before 2.0? Something like: - if there is a unique match on the remote side, use it. I am on the fence but slightly leaning to the negative side on this one. The branch/ref the object was took from when git pull is run does matter, because the name is recorded in the merge summary, so we cannot say There are refs that happen to point at the object you wanted to be pulled, so we'll pick one of them let the integrator pull from that ref we randomly chose is not something we would want. If there is a unique one, that must be the one the user has meant; there is nothing else possible feels like a strong argument, and I was actually contemplating about doing an enhancement on top of Linus's original myself along that line, back when we queued that patch exactly for that reason. But a counter-argument, in the context of Linus's change in question being primarily to avoid end-user mistakes resulting in a bogus request, is that the ref on the remote that happens to match the object but is different from what the user named may be a totally unrelated branch before the user actually has pushed the set of changes the request is going to ask to be pulled. The mistake that this extra strictness tries to avoid is to compose request-pull before pushing what to be pulled and then forgetting to push. Sounds sensible. Then the enhancements that come to my mind are: Change git-request-pull to explicitly take a remote ref as end. This makes sure that it is actually there and the right remote name is picked. Don't require to specify a local ref even if there is no local matching ref, just use the remote sha1 to generate the diffstat and summary. Another thing I'd like to have is to make git-request-pull not generate the usual output if there is no match. Optionally introduce a -f to get back the (maybe bogus) output; in this case a local rev would be needed. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König| Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: BUG: git request-pull broken for plain branches
On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de wrote: $ git rev-parse HEAD 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 $ git ls-remote origin | grep 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 refs/heads/ukl/for-mainline $ git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD /dev/null warn: No match for commit 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 found at origin warn: Are you sure you pushed 'HEAD' there? Notice how HEAD does not match. The error message is perhaps misleading. It's not enough to match the commit. You need to match the branch name too. git used to guess the branch name (from the commit), and it often guessed wrongly. So now they need to match. So you should do git request-pull origin/master origin ukl/for-mainline to let request-pull know that you're requesting a pull for ukl/for-mainline. If you have another name for that branch locally (ie you did something like git push origin local:remote), then you can say git request-pull origin/master origin local-name:remote-name to specify what the branch to be pulled is called locally vs remotely. In other words, what used to be pick some branch randomly is now you need to _specify_ the branch. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: BUG: git request-pull broken for plain branches
Hello Linus, On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 05:05:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de wrote: $ git rev-parse HEAD 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 $ git ls-remote origin | grep 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 refs/heads/ukl/for-mainline $ git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD /dev/null warn: No match for commit 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 found at origin warn: Are you sure you pushed 'HEAD' there? Notice how HEAD does not match. The error message is perhaps misleading. It's not enough to match the commit. You need to match the branch name too. git used to guess the branch name (from the commit), and it often guessed wrongly. So now they need to match. So you should do git request-pull origin/master origin ukl/for-mainline to let request-pull know that you're requesting a pull for ukl/for-mainline. If you have another name for that branch locally (ie you did something like git push origin local:remote), then you can say git request-pull origin/master origin local-name:remote-name to specify what the branch to be pulled is called locally vs remotely. In other words, what used to be pick some branch randomly is now you need to _specify_ the branch. ah, got it. Still some of my concerns stay valid and I also have some new ones: - if there is a branch and a tag on the remote side that match what I specified the outcome depends on the order of git-ls-remote. (minor nit.) - if I have to specify the remote name now, why do I have to also specify my local ref? Isn't the respective $sha1 of the remote side enough to do what is needed? - Isn't $found = $sha1; silly because I cannot pull a rev, only a ref? (side note: git pull linus d91d66e88ea95b6dd21958834414009614385153 gives no error message, only returns 1 and does nothing else.) - Is the result of git request-pull $somecommit origin what is intended? For me it does ... are available in the git repository at: $repository for you to fetch changes ... if the remote HEAD matches the local one. I'd prefer to have an explicit branch name there, or at least HEAD. I liked git guessing the branch name, maybe we can teach it to guess a bit better than it did before 2.0? Something like: - if there is a unique match on the remote side, use it. - if there are = 1 match on the remote side and exactly one matches what I specified as end, use it. - if there are = 1 match on the remote side and exactly one of them is a tag, use the tag - if there are two matches on the remote side, and one is HEAD, pick the other one. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König| Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: BUG: git request-pull broken for plain branches
Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de writes: Hello Linus, On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 05:05:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:55 AM, Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koe...@pengutronix.de wrote: $ git rev-parse HEAD 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 $ git ls-remote origin | grep 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 refs/heads/ukl/for-mainline $ git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD /dev/null warn: No match for commit 9e065e4a5a58308f1a0da4bb80b830929dfa90b3 found at origin warn: Are you sure you pushed 'HEAD' there? Notice how HEAD does not match. The error message is perhaps misleading. It's not enough to match the commit. You need to match the branch name too. git used to guess the branch name (from the commit), and it often guessed wrongly. So now they need to match. So you should do git request-pull origin/master origin ukl/for-mainline to let request-pull know that you're requesting a pull for ukl/for-mainline. Or git request-pull origin/master origin HEAD:ukl/for-mainline I am not Linus, and do not speak for him, but FWIW here are some comments on the ideas. I liked git guessing the branch name, maybe we can teach it to guess a bit better than it did before 2.0? Something like: - if there is a unique match on the remote side, use it. I am on the fence but slightly leaning to the negative side on this one. The branch/ref the object was took from when git pull is run does matter, because the name is recorded in the merge summary, so we cannot say There are refs that happen to point at the object you wanted to be pulled, so we'll pick one of them let the integrator pull from that ref we randomly chose is not something we would want. If there is a unique one, that must be the one the user has meant; there is nothing else possible feels like a strong argument, and I was actually contemplating about doing an enhancement on top of Linus's original myself along that line, back when we queued that patch exactly for that reason. But a counter-argument, in the context of Linus's change in question being primarily to avoid end-user mistakes resulting in a bogus request, is that the ref on the remote that happens to match the object but is different from what the user named may be a totally unrelated branch before the user actually has pushed the set of changes the request is going to ask to be pulled. The mistake that this extra strictness tries to avoid is to compose request-pull before pushing what to be pulled and then forgetting to push. - if there are = 1 match on the remote side and exactly one matches what I specified as end, use it. The original change by Linus being about avoiding mistakes by requiring the user to name what to be pulled, i.e. end, this point of other refs also happen to point at the same object is made irrelevant---if end does have the object the user named to be pulled, that should be used regardless of where other refs point at. - if there are = 1 match on the remote side and exactly one of them is a tag, use the tag - if there are two matches on the remote side, and one is HEAD, pick the other one. Assuming that end does not match the object in these two cases (otherwise your second condition would have caught it), they share the same potential objection as the first one. I dunno. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
