From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com>,
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: check-ref-format: include refs/ in the argument or to strip it?
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 01:46:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140823054646.GA18256@peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140822184515.GL20185@google.com>
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:45:15AM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> > implication of which is that the 'at least one slash'
> > rule was to expect things are 'refs/<anything>' so there will be at
> > least one. Even back then, that <anything> alone had at least one
> > slash (e.g. heads/master), but the intention was *never* that we
> > would forbid <anything> that does not have a slash by feeding
> > <anything> part alone to check-ref-format, i.e. things like
> > "refs/stash" were designed to be allowed.
>
> Now I'm more confused. Until 5f7b202a (2008-01-01), there was a
> comment
>
> if (level < 2)
> return -2; /* at least of form "heads/blah" */
>
> and that behavior has been preserved since the beginning.
>
> Why do most old callers pass a string that doesn't start with refs/
> (e.g., see the callers in 03feddd6, 2005-10-13)? Has the intent been
> to relax the requirement since then?
Yeah, this weird "do not allow refs/foo" behavior has continually
confused me. Coincidentally I just noticed a case today where
"pack-refs" treats "refs/foo" specially for no good reason:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/255729
After much head scratching over the years, I am of the opinion that
nobody every really _meant_ to prevent "refs/foo", and that code
comments like the one you quote above were an attempt to document
existing buggy behavior that was really trying to differentiate "HEAD"
from "refs/*". That's just my opinion, though. :) I'd be happy if all of
the special-treatment of "refs/foo" went away and check_refname_format
always got the full ref.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-23 5:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <gerrit.1408574889668.Iac983fc86f7edd2a0543779d85973c57bf068ca4@code-review.googlesource.com>
[not found] ` <047d7b624d36142d46050131f336@google.com>
2014-08-22 15:41 ` check-ref-format: include refs/ in the argument or to strip it? Jonathan Nieder
2014-08-22 18:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-08-22 18:45 ` Jonathan Nieder
2014-08-23 5:46 ` Jeff King [this message]
2014-08-23 5:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-08-25 17:43 ` Ronnie Sahlberg
2014-08-25 18:26 ` Jonathan Nieder
2014-08-25 19:09 ` Jeff King
2014-08-27 20:53 ` Michael Haggerty
2014-08-25 19:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-08-23 2:59 ` Jonathan Nieder
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140823054646.GA18256@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=sahlberg@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).