36b12c3248
The point of refspec_ref_prefixes() is to look over the set of refspecs and set up an appropriate list of "ref-prefix" strings to send to the server. The logic for handling individual refspec_items has some confusing bits. The final part of our if/else cascade checks this: else if (item->src && !item->exact_sha1) prefix = item->src; But we know that "item->exact_sha1" can never be true, because earlier we did: if (item->exact_sha1 || item->negative) continue; This is due to6c301adb0a(fetch: do not pass ref-prefixes for fetch by exact SHA1, 2018-05-31), which added the continue. So it is tempting to remove the extra exact_sha1 at the end of the cascade, leaving the one at the top of the loop. But I don't think that's quite right. The full cascade is: if (rs->fetch == REFSPEC_FETCH) prefix = item->src; else if (item->dst) prefix = item->dst; else if (item->src && !item->exact_sha1) prefix = item->src; which all comes from6373cb598e(refspec: consolidate ref-prefix generation logic, 2018-05-16). That first "if" is supposed to handle fetches, where we care about the source name, since that is coming from the server. And the rest should be for pushes, where we care about the destination, since that's the name the server will use. And we get that either explicitly from "dst" (for something like "foo:bar") or implicitly from the source (a refspec like "foo" is treated as "foo:foo"). But how should exact_sha1 interact with those? For a fetch, exact_sha1 always means we do not care about sending a name to the server (there is no server refname at all). But pushing an exact sha1 should still care about the destination on the server! It is only if we have to fall back to the implicit source that we need to care if it is a real ref (though arguably such a push does not even make sense; where would the server store it?). So I think that6c301adb0a"broke" the push case by always skipping exact_sha1 items, even though a push should only care about the destination. Of course this is all completely academic. We have still not implemented a v2 push protocol, so even though we do call this function for pushes, we'd never actually send these ref-prefix lines. However, given the effort I spent to figure out what was going on here, and the overlapping exact_sha1 checks, I'd like to rewrite this to preemptively fix the bug, and hopefully make it less confusing. This splits the "if" at the top-level into fetch vs push, and then each handles exact_sha1 appropriately itself. The check for negative refspecs remains outside of either (there is no protocol support for them, so we never send them to the server, but rather use them only to reduce the advertisement we receive). The resulting behavior should be identical for fetches, but hopefully sets us up better for a potential future v2 push. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Git - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
Git is a fast, scalable, distributed revision control system with an unusually rich command set that provides both high-level operations and full access to internals.
Git is an Open Source project covered by the GNU General Public License version 2 (some parts of it are under different licenses, compatible with the GPLv2). It was originally written by Linus Torvalds with help of a group of hackers around the net.
Please read the file INSTALL for installation instructions.
Many Git online resources are accessible from https://git-scm.com/ including full documentation and Git related tools.
See Documentation/gittutorial.adoc to get started, then see
Documentation/giteveryday.adoc for a useful minimum set of commands, and
Documentation/git-<commandname>.adoc for documentation of each command.
If git has been correctly installed, then the tutorial can also be
read with man gittutorial or git help tutorial, and the
documentation of each command with man git-<commandname> or git help <commandname>.
CVS users may also want to read Documentation/gitcvs-migration.adoc
(man gitcvs-migration or git help cvs-migration if git is
installed).
The user discussion and development of Git take place on the Git mailing list -- everyone is welcome to post bug reports, feature requests, comments and patches to git@vger.kernel.org (read Documentation/SubmittingPatches for instructions on patch submission and Documentation/CodingGuidelines).
Those wishing to help with error message, usage and informational message
string translations (localization l10) should see po/README.md
(a po file is a Portable Object file that holds the translations).
To subscribe to the list, send an email to git+subscribe@vger.kernel.org (see https://subspace.kernel.org/subscribing.html for details). The mailing list archives are available at https://lore.kernel.org/git/, https://marc.info/?l=git and other archival sites.
Issues which are security relevant should be disclosed privately to the Git Security mailing list git-security@googlegroups.com.
The maintainer frequently sends the "What's cooking" reports that list the current status of various development topics to the mailing list. The discussion following them give a good reference for project status, development direction and remaining tasks.
The name "git" was given by Linus Torvalds when he wrote the very first version. He described the tool as "the stupid content tracker" and the name as (depending on your mood):
- random three-letter combination that is pronounceable, and not actually used by any common UNIX command. The fact that it is a mispronunciation of "get" may or may not be relevant.
- stupid. contemptible and despicable. simple. Take your pick from the dictionary of slang.
- "global information tracker": you're in a good mood, and it actually works for you. Angels sing, and a light suddenly fills the room.
- "goddamn idiotic truckload of sh*t": when it breaks