On 6/3/22 2:27 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 01:37:48PM +0000, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
This is a feature I've wanted for quite a while. When working on the sparse
index topic, I created a long RFC that actually broke into three topics for
full review upstream. These topics were sequential, so any feedback on an
earlier one required updates to the later ones. I would work on the full
feature and use interactive rebase to update the full list of commits.
However, I would need to update the branches pointing to those sub-topics.
This is really exciting. I'm glad that you're working on it, because I
have also wanted this feature a handful of times over the years.
This definitely would have come in handy when writing MIDX bitmaps,
where I was often editing a local branch pointing at the final topic,
and then trying to reconstruct all of the intermediate branches after
each rebase. Not ever having to do that again sounds like a delight ;-).
pick 2d966282ff3 docs: document bundle URI standard
pick 31396e9171a remote-curl: add 'get' capability
pick 54c6ab70f67 bundle-uri: create basic file-copy logic
pick 96cb2e35af1 bundle-uri: add support for http(s):// and file://
pick 6adaf842684 fetch: add --bundle-uri option
pick 6c5840ed77e fetch: add 'refs/bundle/' to log.excludeDecoration
exec git update-ref refs/heads/bundle-redo/fetch HEAD 6c5840ed77e1bc41c1fe6fb7c894ceede1b8d730
But I wonder if we can or should delay these update-refs as long as
possible. In particular: what happens if I get past this "exec" line (so
that I've already updated my bundle-redo/fetch branch to point at the
new thing), but decide at some later point to abort the rebase?
I think users will expect us to restore bundle-redo/fetch to where it
was before if we end up in that case. Recovering from it manually sounds
like kind of a headache.
What if instead we created labels here, and then delayed all ref updates
to the end by replacing this with:
label bundle-redo/fetch
and then at the end of the todo list we'd add:
exec git update-ref refs/heads/bundle-redo/fetch refs/rewritten/bundle-redo/fetch
If we do all of those ref updates in a single transaction at the end, it
should be much easier to roll back from if desired, and we'd avoid the
aborted-rebase problem entirely.
Thanks,
Taylor
I agree. I could have really used this while juggling all of the
parts of FSMonitor recently. And yes, it should write the updates
at the bottom in case of an abort.
Should this take a branch pattern/regex to limit the set of branches
that are updated (or offered to be updated)? For example, if I have
an intermediate commit in the series that has 2 branch names pointing
at it, do we want to offer to update both of them or only the one
that matches some pattern related to the tip? Or is it sufficient to
just enumerate them at the bottom of the todo list and let the user
delete the lines they don't want?
Should we actually do the update-ref's or should we write a script
that lets the user do it later? The latter would let us also write
out the commands to force update the remote refs if that would be
helpful.
Thanks,
Jeff
