Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Fix this by checking negative refspecs inside of get_ref_states. For
> each ref which matches a negative refspec, copy it into a "skipped" list
> and remove it from the fetch map. This allows us to show the following
> output instead:
>
> * remote jdk19
> Fetch URL: git@xxxxxxxxxx:openjdk/jdk19.git
> Push URL: git@xxxxxxxxxx:openjdk/jdk19.git
> HEAD branch: master
> Remote branches:
> master tracked
> pr/1 skipped
> pr/2 skipped
> pr/3 skipped
> Local ref configured for 'git push':
> master pushes to master (fast-forwardable)
>
> By showing the refs as skipped, it helps clarify that these references
> won't actually be fetched. Alternatively, we could simply remove them
> entirely.
Very sensible.
> @@ -367,6 +368,24 @@ static int get_ref_states(const struct ref *remote_refs, struct ref_states *stat
> die(_("Could not get fetch map for refspec %s"),
> states->remote->fetch.raw[i]);
>
> + /* handle negative refspecs first */
> + for (tail = &fetch_map; *tail; ) {
> + ref = *tail;
> +
> + if (omit_name_by_refspec(ref->name, &states->remote->fetch)) {
> + string_list_append(&states->skipped, abbrev_branch(ref->name));
> +
> + /* Matched a negative refspec, so remove this ref from
> + * consideration for being a new or tracked ref.
> + */
> + *tail = ref->next;
> + free(ref->peer_ref);
> + free(ref);
> + } else {
> + tail = &ref->next;
> + }
> + }
This is somewhat curious. Do we really need to destroy the
fetch_map like the above? I know by removing skipped items from the
list, the existing loop (below) can stop having to worry about them,
but the caller of get_ref_states() may later want to iterate over
the full fetch_map for other reasons (even if the current one does
not, a future version of the caller may have a reason to do so that
we do not know right now yet).
> +
> for (ref = fetch_map; ref; ref = ref->next) {
> if (!ref->peer_ref || !ref_exists(ref->peer_ref->name))
> string_list_append(&states->new_refs, abbrev_branch(ref->name));
IOW, is adding a new condition to this existing loop insufficient?
for (ref = fetch_map; ref; ref = ref->next) {
- if (!ref->peer_ref || !ref_exists(ref->peer_ref->name))
+ if (omit_name_by_refspec(ref->name, &states->remote->fetch))
+ string_list_append(&states->skipped, abbrev_branch(ref->name));
+ else if (!ref->peer_ref || !ref_exists(ref->peer_ref->name))
string_list_append(&states->new_refs, abbrev_branch(ref->name));
else
string_list_append(&states->tracked, abbrev_branch(ref->name));
}
Thanks.
