From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [topgit] tg update error Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:08:48 -0500 Message-ID: <20090214020848.GA9907@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20090212084811.GA14261@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> <20090212092558.GB21074@skywalker> <20090212125621.GB5397@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7veiy3l689.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090213182609.GB31860@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vy6w93hdb.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Aneesh Kumar , madduck@debian.org, git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Feb 14 03:10:23 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LY9z0-0003Zv-K2 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 14 Feb 2009 03:10:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753112AbZBNCIv (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:08:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752858AbZBNCIv (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:08:51 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:44755 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752683AbZBNCIu (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:08:50 -0500 Received: (qmail 27688 invoked by uid 107); 14 Feb 2009 02:09:08 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:09:08 -0500 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:08:48 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vy6w93hdb.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 06:02:56PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > As it turns out, topgit is using refs/top-bases/ in HEAD, > > leading us to re-loosen (at least temporarily) the > > validate_headref check made in b229d18a. This patch does the > > corresponding loosening for the symbolic-ref safety valve, > > so that the two are in agreement once more. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King > > Actually we should simply revert afe5d3d5 altogether with the above > message, as it introduced a test that expects the tightened behaviour. Is there any reason to throw away the "must be in refs/" safety valve, though? That was the actual patch I started with and solved my problem, and the "tighten to refs/heads/" bit came from discussion. That is, I think having a safety valve in symbolic-ref that matches validate_headref is orthogonal to how tightly validate_headref matches. But yes, I obviously failed to run the test suite on the follow-up patch I sent. The final test in t1401 would need to be reverted, as well. -Peff