From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Wong Subject: Re: [bug][bisected] git-svn with root branches Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:38:15 -0700 Message-ID: <20091023063815.GA15445@dcvr.yhbt.net> References: <20091021144113.GA7440@cumin> <20091022063036.GA8081@dcvr.yhbt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Daniel Cordero , git@vger.kernel.org To: Adam Brewster X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 23 08:41:24 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N1Dpz-0003gp-IC for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:41:23 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751916AbZJWGiM (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:38:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751914AbZJWGiM (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:38:12 -0400 Received: from dcvr.yhbt.net ([64.71.152.64]:34108 "EHLO dcvr.yhbt.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751901AbZJWGiL (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:38:11 -0400 Received: from localhost (user-118bg0q.cable.mindspring.com [66.133.192.26]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 31E831F7A1; Fri, 23 Oct 2009 06:38:16 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Adam Brewster wrote: > > I'm not sure why Adam decided the leading slash needed to be removed for > > the git refspec. That said, the globbing/branching code still makes me > > want to hide under a rock and I'm generally afraid to touch it. > > I'll wait for Adam to chime in since he's braver than I am :) > > > How's this for brave: I'm not sure why I did that either. > > Looking at it again it seems correct for the leading / to be ignored because > it has no meaning. What's the difference between the above config and > "branches = *:refs/remotes/*" (besides the fact that one works and one > doesn't)? In both cases I think I've asked for all of the top-level > directories to be branches. But that has nothing to do with the rest of the > patch, so it shouldn't have been included. > That is, continue disregard the / on the actual input because it means > nothing, and add a / in places where the code will crash if it's not there. > Even better would be to find out _why_ $path and $local_ref need a leading / > and fix it that way, but that's more work that I don't have time for right > now. Actually, SVN 1.5+ does not like the leading "/" and trips on an assertion failure on all cases except a standalone "/". That is, "/*" continues to work since we send "/" to SVN::Ra::get_log(). -- Eric Wong