On Feb 16, 2008 12:10 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Although I am not so familiar with this area, the patch somehow
> did not feel right, so I ended up doing a bit of digging.
>
> After the context of the patch, we have this:
>
> if (tracking.matches == 1) {
> sprintf(key, "branch.%s.remote", new_ref);
> git_config_set(key, tracking.remote ? tracking.remote : ".");
> sprintf(key, "branch.%s.merge", new_ref);
> git_config_set(key, tracking.src);
>
> So it looks to me that the code already has intention to set the
> "branch.*.remote" variable to "." when certain condition is met.
> And the condition is "when tracking.remote is NULL, or it is
> already a dot".
I was confused by the use of the ternary operator. I couldn't figure
out how tracking.remote could be NULL. I chalked it up to bit-rot
but them forget to mention that in my email. I'm glad you took
another look, but I still don't understand how tracking.remote can
be NULL and tracking.matches == 1.
> So if there is a remote whose name is "." (or NULL, but I do not
> know when that can happen --- remote.c::make_remote() does not
> allow creating such a remote as far as I can tell), that would
> be found without the added extra code, wouldn't it?
>
> I did a bit of experiment and with this in .git/config:
>
> [remote "."]
> fetch = refs/*:refs/*
>
> it turns out that you do not have to patch the code at all. The
> above manual configuration feels somewhat like an ugly hack but
> perhaps we should make the above two lines implied?
Hmm, that just causes tracking.remote to be set to ".", not to NULL?
Right?
j.
-
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
