Re: Adding files to a git-archive when it is generated, and whats the best way to find out what branch a commit is on?

2009/7/29 Santi Béjar [off-list ref]:

2009/7/29 demerphq [off-list ref]:

quoted

I was wondering if anybody had any suggestions on a sane way to add a
file to a git-archive when it is being produced.

For  instance build procedures that expect to be run inside of a git
WD wont work if built from an archived version of the tree. Being able
to provide a file of additional data to the archive package would be a
very convenient way to work around this.

Ideally id like to be able to specify a set of additional files to
include in the archive as part of the git-archive command line
interface, but I'd be nearly as a happy with almost any solution other
than the one I came up with, which is to use archive to generate a tar
file, then use tar to append the additional files to the tar, and then
compress it. This process turns out to be quite slow in comparison to
producing a compressed archive directly from git-archive.

Then I don't know. It is exactly the way it is done in git.git itself,
look the dist target in the makefile.

So then git also would benefit from support in git-archive for adding
arbitrary files to the archive during generation?

One problem here is that we (the Perl project) are supporting VMS
smoke-testers and need the ability to provide snapshots that are
buildable without using git at all. So we hacked the snapshot support
in gitweb to do this. However we dont want to do this for every
commit, just the ones that people actually fetch. So while the process
we use is fine for rolling a dist, its not so fine when people are
expecting a download to start promptly after clicking on the snapshot
link.

quoted

Another question is whether anyone has any advice on the best way to
find out the "best" branch an arbitrary commit is on. Where best can
be flexibly definied to handle commits that are reachable from
multiple branches.  I have hacked a solution involving git-log and
grep, but it performs quite poorly. I was wondering if there is a
better solution.

The "best" tag is easy: git describe commit. For branches I think you
could use "git name-ref --refs=refs/heads/* commit", because git
describe does not have a --branches flag.

Dang, I guess this is from a newer release than mine. So now i have an
excuse to upgrade.

:-)

Yves




-- 
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"