From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael J Gruber Subject: Re: check-ref-format question Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 09:24:07 +0200 Message-ID: <4A0BC717.1060900@drmicha.warpmail.net> References: <93c3eada0905121709k73a47bddu60def6b5fbc1b15e@mail.gmail.com> <4A0AD5A2.2090103@drmicha.warpmail.net> <93c3eada0905131726p3afe8e68j160bd3931886093d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Barkalow , Junio C Hamano To: geoffrey.russell@gmail.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 14 09:24:31 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 1M4VIt-0002iA-2q for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 14 May 2009 09:24:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754979AbZENHYT (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758364AbZENHYT (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:19 -0400 Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:32893 "EHLO out1.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755815AbZENHYS (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:18 -0400 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97E05345FED; Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:16 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 8QN0cA6/4XGtEwgcskKGljJcCv/cY4yavF6Oi/7K0/U5 1242285856 Received: from localhost.localdomain (whitehead.math.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.44.12]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB15B2812F; Thu, 14 May 2009 03:24:15 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b5pre) Gecko/20090511 Lightning/1.0pre Shredder/3.0b3pre In-Reply-To: <93c3eada0905131726p3afe8e68j160bd3931886093d@mail.gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Geoff Russell venit, vidit, dixit 14.05.2009 02:26: > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Michael J Gruber > wrote: >> Geoff Russell venit, vidit, dixit 13.05.2009 02:09: >>> 1 $ git --version >>> git version 1.6.2.3 >>> 2 $ git check-ref-format xxxx && echo OK >>> 3 $ git-check-ref-format --branch xxxx && echo OK >>> xxxx >>> OK >>> 4 $ git check-ref-format --branch xxxx && echo OK >>> usage: git check-ref-format refname >>> >>> >>> 2 seems wrong, >>> I tried 3 after looking at builtin-check-ref-format.c >>> I couldn't find any test cases in the git/t directory >>> >>> From the documenation, I expect "git check-ref-format xxx" to return 0 if xxx is >>> a valid branch or ref name. git version 1.6.3 gives the same results. >> >> There are several things going on: >> >> A) In 3 you use a different git than in 1,2,4. You told us the latter is >> 1.6.2.3, and I'm telling you the former contains v1.6.2.1-310-ga31dca0 >> (which has the new --branch option). >> This simply checks whether refs/heads/xxxx is sane. (It also resolves >> @{-1} and such, which is what makes it useful at all.) > > Sorry, my mistake I was running in 2 windows on 2 machine and got > confused. Ignore > line 3 in my example. > >> >> B) "master" certainly looks like a valid refname, the doc seems to imply >> that it should pass the check. > > $ git --version > git version 1.6.2.3 > $ git check-ref-format xxxx && echo OK > $ git check-ref-format master && echo OK > $ git check-ref-format master/xxxx && echo OK > OK > > I'm confused. > > Geoff. Please read on to my item C), and check the documentation patch which I submitted. If you're still confused after that I need to revise my patch ;) > > >> >> C) Looking at the code, check-ref-format checks explicitly for the >> presence of at least 2 levels: foo/bar is good, foo is bad. So, master >> always had been bad, as well (or bad) as full sha1s! >> >> The code has always behaved like C since its inception but I don't know >> the rationale behind the 2 level requirement. Daniel, Junio? >> >> Michael >>