Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2016-07-25

Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] push: allow pushing new branches with --force-with-lease

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-07-25 22:21:35

John Keeping [off-list ref] writes:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:28:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
John Keeping [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
If there is no upstream information for a branch, it is likely that it
is newly created and can safely be pushed under the normal fast-forward
rules.  Relax the --force-with-lease check so that we do not reject
these branches immediately but rather attempt to push them as new
branches, using the null SHA-1 as the expected value.

In fact, it is already possible to push new branches using the explicit
--force-with-lease=<branch>:<expect> syntax, so all we do here is make
this behaviour the default if no explicit "expect" value is specified.
I like the loss of an extra field from "struct ref".

I suspect that the if/else cascade in the loop in apply_cas() can
also be taught that ':' followed by an empty string asks to check
that the target ref does not exist, in order to make it a bit more
useful for folks who do not rely on the "use the last observed
status of the tracking branch".

That would make the "explicit" test much less cumbersome to read.
Yes, that's nicer and it mirrors the syntax for deleting a remote
branch.

I've pulled it out as a preparatory step because I like the fact that
the "explicit" test passes even before the patch that is the main point
of the series.
Ah, our mails crossed ;-)

Thanks, I'll read these three patches.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help