Bugs in git-gui and git-push when pushing src:dst to mirror?

Bugs in git-gui and git-push when pushing src:dst to mirror?

[Mark Burton]

Hi,

Using git 1.6.0.4.

I just tried to push using git-gui to a mirror of the current
repository and it failed because git-gui included a src:dest refspec
and that upset git-push as the remote is a mirror. So, I think that it would
be useful if git-gui notices when the remote is a mirror and does not
pass the refspec (I shall try to form a patch later when I have some time).

The other issue is that although git-push did print the usage blurb,
it didn't actually produce a message saying what it's problem was.
Looking at the source, I would have expected to have seen "--mirror
can't be combined with refspecs" printed but it didn't happen. Here's
what I got when I run the same command (as attempted by git-gui) on the
command line:

$ git push -v tako refs/heads/multi-stream:refs/heads/multi-stream
usage: git push [--all | --mirror] [--dry-run] [--tags] [--receive-pack=<git-receive-pack>] [--repo=<repository>] [-f | --force] [-v] [<repository> <refspec>...]

    -v, --verbose         be verbose
    --repo <repository>   repository
    --all                 push all refs
    --mirror              mirror all refs
    --tags                push tags
    --dry-run             dry run
    -f, --force           force updates
    --thin                use thin pack
    --receive-pack <receive-pack>
                          receive pack program
    --exec <receive-pack>
                          receive pack program


Any ideas?

Cheers,

Mark

Re: Bugs in git-gui and git-push when pushing src:dst to mirror?

[Mark Burton]

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 13:08:59 +0000
Mark Burton <markb@ordern.com> wrote:

> The other issue is that although git-push did print the usage blurb,
> it didn't actually produce a message saying what it's problem was.

Ah, just twigged, 1.6.0.4 doesn't include b259f09b181c (Make push more
verbose about illegal combination of options) so the lack of error message
from push is understandable.

Cheers,

Mark