Quoting Paolo Bonzini <bonzini@xxxxxxx>:
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-push.txt b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> index 2653388..0d6fcaa 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-push.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-push.txt
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ git-push - Update remote refs along with associated objects
> SYNOPSIS
> --------
> [verse]
> -'git push' [--all | --mirror | --tags] [--dry-run] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>]
> +'git push' [--all | --mirror | --tags] [--current] [--dry-run] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>]
Shouldn't this be "[--all | --mirror | --tags | --current]" instead? In other words, does it make sense to say "git push --all --current"?
> @@ -71,6 +71,15 @@ nor in any Push line of the corresponding remotes file---see below).
> Instead of naming each ref to push, specifies that all
> refs under `$GIT_DIR/refs/heads/` be pushed.
>
> +--current::
> + Independent of the other options, restrict pushing to the current
> + HEAD.
> +
> + Refspecs given in the configuration is still used to find the
> + destination name of the current branch. However, this option
> + cannot be specified if an explicit refspec is given on the
> + command line, because it would be useless and possibly confusing.
> +
The second and subsequent paragraphs must be dedented, and the blank line between paragraphs should be replaced by a single line with '+' on it. You can find examples in the same file (e.g. description of <refspec>).
Instead of correcting a grammatical error you made here in patch 1/3 with a later patch 2/3, please fix it here.
> diff --git a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh
> index 2d2633f..3333ce9 100755
> --- a/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh
> +++ b/t/t5516-fetch-push.sh
> @@ -586,4 +586,56 @@ test_expect_success 'push with branches containing #' '
> git checkout master
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'push --current fails on empty repository' '
> + git init &&
> + mkdir b.git &&
> + (cd b.git && git init --bare) &&
> + echo a > b &&
> + git add b &&
> + git commit -m a &&
> + git checkout -b branch &&
> + echo bb > b &&
> + git add b &&
> + git commit -m branch &&
> + git checkout master &&
> + ! git push --current b.git
> +'
If your final belief (which I happen to agree) is that
% git push --current
% git push --current origin
% git push --current over.there.example.com:project.git
should work as expected (that is, they should push the current branch to the same name) from a repository without any special configuration, don't say "push --current fails" on the title as if you think it is the right thing to do.
Instead, mark clearly that the code after this patch is still broken, like this:
test_expect_failure 'push --current into an empty repository' '
...
git push --current b.git
'
and change expect_failure to expect_success in the later patch that fixes the breakage.
> +test_expect_success 'push --current succeeds when push is configured' '
> + git config remote.bremote.url b.git &&
> + git config remote.bremote.push refs/heads/master:refs/heads/master &&
> + git push --current bremote &&
> + test `git rev-parse master` = `cd b.git && git rev-parse master`
> +'
The style of the existing tests in the script isn't
test `git rev-parse master` = `cd b.git && git rev-parse master`
but is
test "$(git rev-parse master)" = "$(cd b.git && git rev-parse master)"
--
Nanako Shiraishi
http://ivory.ap.teacup.com/nanako3/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html