Re: PUSH_HEAD, was Re: FETCH_HEAD question

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

 



Hi,

On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> FETCH_HEAD is something the user who is sitting in front of the 
> repository controls with "git fetch" into it.  The objects referenced 
> from it is not part of the "reachable" set, and expectation is that 
> anything that requires the objects will happen before that user decides 
> to actively go prune unreachable objects.
> 
> PUSH_HEAD is quite different, and it needs to be handled a lot more 
> carefully.

Well, when I talked about the push equivalent of FETCH_HEAD I really meant 
that it be exactly that.  No additional taking care, that's the user's 
responsibility.

I got carried away with the "2nd push will not need to push the objects 
again", and in the meantime I think that should not be the case.

The main use for it I had in mind was to have some obviously temporary 
"ref" that you could push to.

However, I think that would not bode well, as receive.denyCurrentBranch 
will error out early, and rightfully so.

The way out I _could_ think of right now is to have a REFUSED_PUSH_HEAD 
_just_ for the denyCurrentBranch case, but it's bedtime for lil' Dscho, so 
I cannot think clearly about that today.

Ciao,
Dscho "who will be dreaming of detached, split and pushed heads all night long"

--
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

[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