2009/1/16 Santi Béjar <santi@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > 2009/1/16 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, 16 Jan 2009, Santi Béjar wrote: >> >>> 2009/1/16 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: >>> > >>> > Note that this affects creating bundles with --all; I contend that it >>> > is a good change to add the HEAD, so that cloning from such a bundle >>> > will give you a current branch. However, I had to fix t5701 as it >>> > assumed that --all does not imply HEAD. >>> >>> From the description I understand that it only affects when the HEAD is >>> detached, but in t5701 the HEAD is not detached so nothing should be >>> fixed. >> >> The error in t5701 was that it _wanted_ to test a bundle without a HEAD, >> but it actually created it with --all. That was implying that --all does >> not mean HEAD > > Yes, that is the current behaviour. > >> , and I disagree with that. > > I know you disagree, but in the commit log you said: > > --- > [PATCH] revision walker: include a detached HEAD in --all > > When HEAD is detached, --all should list it, too, logically, as a > detached HEAD is by definition a temporary, unnamed branch. > --- > > so nothing talks about changing the behaviour when the HEAD is not detached. > > But the problem with t5701 is another thing. If you run this: > > git init > : >file > git add . > git commit -m1 > git bundle create b1.bundle --all HEAD > git ls-remote b1.bundle > git rev-parse --all HEAD > > you will see that the same rev-parse parameters in "git bundle" > produce tree lines while with "git rev-parse" only two are produced. > Sorry, there are two problems with t5701, the one of the changing behaviour of the --all flag and this one. Santi -- 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
