On 08/25/2014 09:09 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> [...]
> This patch introduces a new "always" mode for the
> core.logallrefupdates option which will log updates to
> everything under refs/, regardless where in the hierarchy it
> is (we still will not log things like ORIG_HEAD and
> FETCH_HEAD, which are
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:26:36AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> It's still very puzzling to me. The comment came at the same time as
> the behavior, in v0.99.9~120 (git-check-ref-format: reject funny ref
> names, 2005-10-13). Before that, the behavior was even stranger ---
> it checked that t
Ronnie Sahlberg writes:
> There are also a lot of places where we assume that a refs will start
> with "refs/heads/" and not just "refs/"
> for_each_branch_ref(), log_ref_setup() (so no reflogs) is_branch() to
> name a few.
for-each-BRANCH-ref and is-BRANCH are explicitly about branches and
it i
Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>> Yeah, this weird "do not allow refs/foo" behavior has continually
>> confused me. Coincidentally I just noticed a case today where
>> "pack-refs" treats "refs/foo" specially for no good reason:
>>
>> http://thread.gm
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:45:15AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> >implication of which is that the 'at least one slash'
>> > rule was to expect things are 'refs/' so there will be at
>> > least on
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> After much head scratching over the years, I am of the opinion that
> nobody every really _meant_ to prevent "refs/foo"...
Yup, that matches my understanding.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:45:15AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> >implication of which is that the 'at least one slash'
> > rule was to expect things are 'refs/' so there will be at
> > least one. Even back then, that alone had at least one
> > slash
Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Michael Haggerty wrote[1]:
>>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
The check-ref-format documentation is pretty unclear, but the
intent is that it would be used like
git check-ref-format heads/master
(see the surviving examples in contrib/examples/). Th
Junio C Hamano wrote:
>implication of which is that the 'at least one slash'
> rule was to expect things are 'refs/' so there will be at
> least one. Even back then, that alone had at least one
> slash (e.g. heads/master), but the intention was *never* that we
> would forbid tha
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Michael Haggerty wrote[1]:
>> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
>>> The check-ref-format documentation is pretty unclear, but the
>>> intent is that it would be used like
>>>
>>> git check-ref-format heads/master
>>>
>>> (see the surviving examples in contrib/examples/). That
Hi,
Michael Haggerty wrote[1]:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> The check-ref-format documentation is pretty unclear, but the
>> intent is that it would be used like
>>
>> git check-ref-format heads/master
>>
>> (see the surviving examples in contrib/examples/). That way, it can
>> enforce the ru
11 matches
Mail list logo
