Re: should git maintenance prefetch be taught to honor remote.fetch refspec?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 05:07:09PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 4/2/2021 4:43 PM, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > On 4/2/2021 2:27 PM, Tom Saeger wrote:
> >> generally isn't it still changing the right-hand side of refspec?
> >>
> >> replacing ":refs/" with ":refs/prefetch/"
> > 
> > Right, this substring replacement might be easiest to achieve. The
> > 'struct refspec' doesn't make it incredibly easy. Perhaps skipping
> > the refspec parsing and just doing that substring swap directly from
> > the config value might be the best approach.
> > 
> >> This would still work for refspecs with negative patterns right?
> > 
> > One of the issues is that negative patterns have no ":refs/"
> > substring.
> > 
> > The other issue is that exact matches (no "*") have an exact
> > string in the destination, too, so replacing the _entire_
> > destination with "refs/prefetch/<remote>/*" breaks the refspec.
> > I think the substring approach will still work here.
> 
> I updated my branch with the substring approach, which is
> probably the better solution. Please give it a try. I don't
> expect that change to help the FreeBSD build, but we will see.


This worked for all the scenarios I tried, which had both negatives and
multi remote fetch values.

Looks good!

Reviewed-by: Tom Saeger <tom.saeger@xxxxxxxxxx>

>  
> > [1] https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/924
> > [2] https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/924/checks?check_run_id=2256079534
> 
> Thanks,
> -Stolee



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux