git push bug?

git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

I thougth I could create a new branch on the server using:

# > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11 forwarding.
updating 'refs/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
 from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
 to bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
Generating pack...
Done counting 0 objects.
Writing 0 objects...
Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
ng refs/linus funny refname
error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'

but that doesn't work. Am I doing this wrong?

git 1.5.3.4
 
   Jocke

Re: git push bug?

[Steffen Prohaska]

On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

>
> I thougth I could create a new branch on the server using:
>
> # > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
> Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11  
> forwarding.
> updating 'refs/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
>  from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
>  to bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
> Generating pack...
> Done counting 0 objects.
> Writing 0 objects...
> Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
> ng refs/linus funny refname
> error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
>
> but that doesn't work. Am I doing this wrong?

Include 'heads' in your remote refspec:

    git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/heads/linus

You may need to cleanup though. I'm not sure if the remote side
already created 'refs/linus'. The error message only indicates that
locally git refused to create the "funny refname". Pushing a refspec
with an empty local part should delete the "funny refname" on the
remote:

    git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :refs/linus

Did this solve your problem?

	Steffen

Re: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 17:14 +0200, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> 
> >
> > I thougth I could create a new branch on the server using:
> >
> > # > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
> > Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11  
> > forwarding.
> > updating 'refs/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
> >  from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
> >  to bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
> > Generating pack...
> > Done counting 0 objects.
> > Writing 0 objects...
> > Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> > error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
> > ng refs/linus funny refname
> > error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
> >
> > but that doesn't work. Am I doing this wrong?
> 
> Include 'heads' in your remote refspec:
> 
>     git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/heads/linus

Now the push went OK:
git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/head/linus
Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11 forwarding.
updating 'refs/head/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
  from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
  to   bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
Generating pack...
Done counting 0 objects.
Writing 0 objects...
Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
refs/head/linus: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -> bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1

but there is no linus branch in the server repo!

However:
 git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus

creates a linus branch in the server and 

 git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :linus
 Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11 forwarding. 
 deleting 'refs/heads/linus'
 refs/heads/linus: bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1 -> deleted
 Everything up-to-date

deletes the linus branch on the server and so does
git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :refs/heads/linus

ahh, now I see. When creating the branch the refspec needs to be refs/heads/linus,
not refs/head/linus

refs/head/linus will create just that on the server. git branch does not look
there, only in refs/heads

Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I delete
a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
Also confusing that git lets me create refs/head/linus when git branch
cannot find it.

 Jocke

> You may need to cleanup though. I'm not sure if the remote side
> already created 'refs/linus'. The error message only indicates that
> locally git refused to create the "funny refname". Pushing a refspec
> with an empty local part should delete the "funny refname" on the
> remote:
> 
>     git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :refs/linus
> 
> Did this solve your problem?
> 
> 	Steffen
> 

Re: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 18:01 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 17:14 +0200, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
> > On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > I thougth I could create a new branch on the server using:
> > >
> > > # > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
> > > Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11  
> > > forwarding.
> > > updating 'refs/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
> > >  from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
> > >  to bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
> > > Generating pack...
> > > Done counting 0 objects.
> > > Writing 0 objects...
> > > Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> > > error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
> > > ng refs/linus funny refname
> > > error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
> > >
> > > but that doesn't work. Am I doing this wrong?
> > 
> > Include 'heads' in your remote refspec:
> > 
> >     git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/heads/linus
> 
> Now the push went OK:
> git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/head/linus
> Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11 forwarding.
> updating 'refs/head/linus' using 'refs/heads/linus'
>   from 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000
>   to   bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
> Generating pack...
> Done counting 0 objects.
> Writing 0 objects...
> Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> refs/head/linus: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -> bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1
> 
> but there is no linus branch in the server repo!
> 
> However:
>  git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus
> 
> creates a linus branch in the server and 
> 
>  git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :linus
>  Warning: No xauth data; using fake authentication data for X11 forwarding. 
>  deleting 'refs/heads/linus'
>  refs/heads/linus: bbf25010f1a6b761914430f5fca081ec8c7accd1 -> deleted
>  Everything up-to-date
> 
> deletes the linus branch on the server and so does
> git push  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git :refs/heads/linus
> 
> ahh, now I see. When creating the branch the refspec needs to be refs/heads/linus,
> not refs/head/linus
> 
> refs/head/linus will create just that on the server. git branch does not look
> there, only in refs/heads
> 
> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I delete
> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> Also confusing that git lets me create refs/head/linus when git branch
> cannot find it.
> 
>  Jocke

BTW this does not work either:

git reset --hard HEAD^
git push -f  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git +master:master
updating 'refs/heads/master'
  from 9c344d18d01221c8f25080cb58910e6b09efbf55
  to   5761a9e5924b34615c748fba2dcb977ed04c1243
Generating pack...
Done counting 0 objects.
Writing 0 objects...
Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
error: denying non-fast forward refs/heads/master (you should pull first)
ng refs/heads/master non-fast forward
error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'

I thought the + in +master:master and the -f option should let me
do that.

Re: git push bug?

[Steffen Prohaska]

On Oct 18, 2007, at 6:01 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I  
> delete
> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> Also confusing that git lets me create refs/head/linus when git branch
> cannot find it.

I absolutely agree. But I'm not sure if those who use git since the
ancient days do agree too.
	
	Steffen

Re: git push bug?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I delete 
> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?

I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just

	git push <remote> linus

and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting games, 
not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".

Ciao,
Dscho

Re: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 17:21 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> 
> > Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I delete 
> > a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> 
> I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
> 
> 	git push <remote> linus
> 
> and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting games, 
> not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".

First, I didn't know that I could do that.
Secondly, I was also looking do v2.6.23:linus refspecs

 Jocke 

Re: git push bug?

[Steffen Prohaska]

On Oct 18, 2007, at 6:21 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
>> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I  
>> delete
>> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
>
> I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
>
> 	git push <remote> linus
>
> and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting  
> games,
> not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".

But you need a full refspec starting with 'refs/heads/' if you want to
create a new branch on the remote side.

	Steffen

Re: git push bug?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote:

> On Oct 18, 2007, at 6:21 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > 
> > > Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I delete
> > > a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> > 
> > I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
> > 
> > 	git push <remote> linus
> > 
> > and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting games,
> > not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".
> 
> But you need a full refspec starting with 'refs/heads/' if you want to
> create a new branch on the remote side.

No.  Not if the name is the same on the local side.

Ciao,
Dscho

Re: git push bug?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 17:21 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > 
> > > Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I 
> > > delete a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> > 
> > I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
> > 
> > 	git push <remote> linus
> > 
> > and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting 
> > games, not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this 
> > tag".
> 
> First, I didn't know that I could do that. Secondly, I was also looking 
> do v2.6.23:linus refspecs


First, then our documentation could be better.  How?

Second, why not "git checkout -b linus v2.6.23 && git push origin linus"?

Ciao,
Dscho

Re: git push bug?

[Shawn O. Pearce]

Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> wrote:
> On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >
> ># > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
...
> >error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
> >ng refs/linus funny refname
> >error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
...
> You may need to cleanup though. I'm not sure if the remote side
> already created 'refs/linus'. The error message only indicates that
> locally git refused to create the "funny refname".

Cute.  The error message "error: refusing to create .. locally"
is actually coming from the remote site.  Locally here is
actually remotely.  We *really* should change that.  Its l.169 of
receive-pack.c, which is only running on the remote side.  :)

Anyone game to improve that error message?  Should be a pretty
simple patch.  One of the may low-hanging fruits in Git.

-- 
Shawn.

Re: git push bug?

[Shawn O. Pearce]

Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se> wrote:
> BTW this does not work either:
> 
> git reset --hard HEAD^
> git push -f  ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git +master:master
> updating 'refs/heads/master'
>   from 9c344d18d01221c8f25080cb58910e6b09efbf55
>   to   5761a9e5924b34615c748fba2dcb977ed04c1243
> Generating pack...
> Done counting 0 objects.
> Writing 0 objects...
> Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> error: denying non-fast forward refs/heads/master (you should pull first)
> ng refs/heads/master non-fast forward
> error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
> 
> I thought the + in +master:master and the -f option should let me
> do that.

Yes, but its only on the client side.

See when we do a push the local client side determines if the push is
going to be a fast-forward or not.  If it isn't then the git-push
client aborts before it even uploads data to the remote side.
The --force or + can be used to make the client side skip this
check and just plow forward anyway.

But the remote side can also veto a non-fast-forward update.  By
default it refuses to allow such updates as they can orphan commits
(and thus potentially lose important work).  See the config option
receive.denyNonFastForwards; you may want to set this to true in
the remote side's config file.

-- 
Shawn.

Re: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 23:00 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 17:21 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I 
> > > > delete a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> > > 
> > > I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
> > > 
> > > 	git push <remote> linus
> > > 
> > > and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting 
> > > games, not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this 
> > > tag".
> > 
> > First, I didn't know that I could do that. Secondly, I was also looking 
> > do v2.6.23:linus refspecs
> 
> 
> First, then our documentation could be better.  How?

Well, it isn't clear to me how all this is supposed to work and
what is bugs. Clearifying that would help.

For instances I did a push with v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus and now
I got a branch with the SHA1 of v2.6.23 tag(0b8bc8b91cf6befea20fe78b90367ca7b61cfa0d)
in it. Makes gitk display that branch as "linus^{}".

> 
> Second, why not "git checkout -b linus v2.6.23 && git push origin linus"?

An extra checkout that takes time but works. Doesn't make the above
"weiredness" go away though.

 Jocke

> 
> Ciao,
> Dscho
> 
> 

Re: git push bug?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

> On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 23:00 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > 
> > > First, I didn't know that I could do that. Secondly, I was also 
> > > looking do v2.6.23:linus refspecs
> > 
> > 
> > First, then our documentation could be better.  How?
> 
> Well, it isn't clear to me how all this is supposed to work and what is 
> bugs. Clearifying that would help.
> 
> For instances I did a push with v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus and now I got a 
> branch with the SHA1 of v2.6.23 
> tag(0b8bc8b91cf6befea20fe78b90367ca7b61cfa0d) in it. Makes gitk display 
> that branch as "linus^{}".

It strikes me as really odd that you would _want_ to create a branch 
remotely, that has _never_ existed locally.

> > Second, why not "git checkout -b linus v2.6.23 && git push origin 
> > linus"?
> 
> An extra checkout that takes time but works.

Not only that: before trying to publish something, I would have expected 
you to have that branch locally, and that you actually worked on it.

> Doesn't make the above "weiredness" go away though.

Yes it does.

git checkout -b <branchname> resolves to the commit that the tag pointed 
to.  So it would not push a tag, which you did.

Of course you could do what you planned to do, if you knew git better.  
But you are not familiar enough with git's inner workings yet, so I 
suggest to stay with things for now that work _always_, and exactly as 
expected.

Such as creating a branch locally, with exactly the name that you plan it 
to have remotely, and then pushing it with "git push origin <branchname>".  
Easy as apple pie.

Ciao,
Dscho

RE: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johannes Schindelin [mailto:Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de] 
> Sent: den 19 oktober 2007 19:25
> To: Joakim Tjernlund
> Cc: Steffen Prohaska; git
> Subject: Re: git push bug?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 23:00 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > 
> > > > First, I didn't know that I could do that. Secondly, I was also 
> > > > looking do v2.6.23:linus refspecs
> > > 
> > > 
> > > First, then our documentation could be better.  How?
> > 
> > Well, it isn't clear to me how all this is supposed to work 
> and what is 
> > bugs. Clearifying that would help.
> > 
> > For instances I did a push with v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus 
> and now I got a 
> > branch with the SHA1 of v2.6.23 
> > tag(0b8bc8b91cf6befea20fe78b90367ca7b61cfa0d) in it. Makes 
> gitk display 
> > that branch as "linus^{}".
> 
> It strikes me as really odd that you would _want_ to create a branch 
> remotely, that has _never_ existed locally.

It strikes me as really odd that a core developers like yourself
hasn't tried to justify/explain why push works as it does.

As I am trying to convince our dev. group here to move to git instead of subversion, I
need to learn how git works. Now I have gotten to the push function and I need
to know what can be done with push and how, pitfalls too. As I go along I find behavior
that I find odd and report these to the list.

 git push <repo> v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus
will make a tag look like a branch

 git push <repo> linus:linus
won't let me create the remote branch linus but
 git push <repo> linus
will

 git push <repo> :linus
OOPS, now I just deleted remote branch linus, no warning
 
 git push <repo> linus:refs/head/linus
creates a branch that is invisible(wont show in git branch -a)

 git push <repo> linus:refs/heads/newbranch
creates remote branch newbranch, but you have to know the magic words
refs/heads/ to do it.

Se what I mean? 

> 
> > > Second, why not "git checkout -b linus v2.6.23 && git push origin 
> > > linus"?
> > 
> > An extra checkout that takes time but works.
> 
> Not only that: before trying to publish something, I would 
> have expected 
> you to have that branch locally, and that you actually worked on it.
> 
> > Doesn't make the above "weiredness" go away though.
> 
> Yes it does.

No it doesn't. If someone else in my group wants to create a branch they
might do the same mistakes as I did.

> 
> git checkout -b <branchname> resolves to the commit that the 
> tag pointed 
> to.  So it would not push a tag, which you did.
> 
> Of course you could do what you planned to do, if you knew 
> git better.  
> But you are not familiar enough with git's inner workings yet, so I 
> suggest to stay with things for now that work _always_, and 
> exactly as 
> expected.
> 
> Such as creating a branch locally, with exactly the name that 
> you plan it 
> to have remotely, and then pushing it with "git push origin 
> <branchname>".  
> Easy as apple pie.
> 
> Ciao,
> Dscho
> 
> 
> 

RE: git push bug?

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:

> > From: Johannes Schindelin [mailto:Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de] 
> > 
> > On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 2007-10-18 at 23:00 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > First, I didn't know that I could do that. Secondly, I was also 
> > > > > looking do v2.6.23:linus refspecs
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > First, then our documentation could be better.  How?
> > > 
> > > Well, it isn't clear to me how all this is supposed to work and what 
> > > is bugs. Clearifying that would help.
> > > 
> > > For instances I did a push with v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus and now I 
> > > got a branch with the SHA1 of v2.6.23 
> > > tag(0b8bc8b91cf6befea20fe78b90367ca7b61cfa0d) in it. Makes gitk 
> > > display that branch as "linus^{}".
> > 
> > It strikes me as really odd that you would _want_ to create a branch 
> > remotely, that has _never_ existed locally.
> 
> It strikes me as really odd that a core developers like yourself
> hasn't tried to justify/explain why push works as it does.

Well, I explained that I think the "src:dst" way to specify things are not 
meant for git newbies.  Don't use it.

git push <remote> <branchname> works exactly as advertised.  It pushes the 
specified branch to the remote repository.

> As I am trying to convince our dev. group here to move to git instead of 
> subversion, I need to learn how git works. Now I have gotten to the push 
> function and I need to know what can be done with push and how, pitfalls 
> too. As I go along I find behavior that I find odd and report these to 
> the list.
> 
>  git push <repo> v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus
> will make a tag look like a branch

Don't use src:dest notation.

>  git push <repo> linus:linus
> won't let me create the remote branch linus

Don't use src:dest notation.

> but
>  git push <repo> linus
> will

Use this.  This is good.

>  git push <repo> :linus
> OOPS, now I just deleted remote branch linus, no warning

Don't use src:dest notation.

>  git push <repo> linus:refs/head/linus
> creates a branch that is invisible(wont show in git branch -a)

Don't use src:dest notation.

>  git push <repo> linus:refs/heads/newbranch
> creates remote branch newbranch, but you have to know the magic words
> refs/heads/ to do it.

Don't use src:dest notation.

> Se what I mean? 

Yes.

I hope you return the honour.

> > > > Second, why not "git checkout -b linus v2.6.23 && git push origin 
> > > > linus"?
> > > 
> > > An extra checkout that takes time but works.
> > 
> > Not only that: before trying to publish something, I would have 
> > expected you to have that branch locally, and that you actually worked 
> > on it.
> > 
> > > Doesn't make the above "weiredness" go away though.
> > 
> > Yes it does.
> 
> No it doesn't. If someone else in my group wants to create a branch they 
> might do the same mistakes as I did.

Yes, it does.  You no longer can push a tag onto a remote branch by 
accident.  Just don't use the src:dest notation.  Forget about it.  You 
definitely don't need it before you understand git better.

Hth,
Dscho

Re: git push bug?

[Steffen Prohaska]

On Oct 18, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

>
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
>
>> On Oct 18, 2007, at 6:21 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. Why can I  
>>>> delete
>>>> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
>>>
>>> I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
>>>
>>> 	git push <remote> linus
>>>
>>> and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play interesting  
>>> games,
>>> not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".
>>
>> But you need a full refspec starting with 'refs/heads/' if you  
>> want to
>> create a new branch on the remote side.
>
> No.  Not if the name is the same on the local side.

You're right. The documentation of git-send-pack says what you're
saying:

'''
When one or more <ref> are specified explicitly, it can be either a  
single pattern, or a pair of such pattern separated by a colon  
":" (this means that a ref name cannot have a colon in it). A single  
pattern <name> is just a shorthand for <name>:<name>
'''

Here it says that <name> is a shorthand for <name>:<name>.
An later it states

'''
If <dst> does not match any remote ref, either
    * it has to start with "refs/"; <dst> is used as the destination  
literally in this case.
    * <src> == <dst> and the ref that matched the <src> must not  
exist in the set of remote refs; the ref matched <src> locally is  
used as the name of the destination.
'''

If <src> == <dst> then <dst> will be created even if it didn't exist.

I think the current implementation though is a bit different.
It will created a new branch for a colon-less refspec, that is

    git push origin work/topic

will create a new ref on the remote. But

    git push origin work/topic:work/topic

will _not_.


Until you corrected me, I believed that new branches will never
be created on the remote side unless a full ref is used. That is
I expected that only

    git push origin refs/heads/work/topic

would work.

I thought this would be another safety net -- kind of a reminder
not to push the wrong branch by accident.

I still like the idea, but apparently git didn't ever support what
I thought it would.

Maybe adding some command line flags making the different tasks
explicit could help:

     git push --create origin work/new-topic
     git push --delete origin work/old-topic
     git push --non-standard origin refs/funny/ref

We already have similar flags

     --all: all branches
     --tags: all tags
     --force: force non-fast-forward.

I haven't fully thought this through. Maybe I'll come up with a patch
later.

	Steffen

Re: git push bug?

[Steffen Prohaska]

Shawn,
sp/push-refspec definitely needs more work (see below).


On Oct 20, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Steffen Prohaska wrote:

>
> On Oct 18, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
>>>
>>> But you need a full refspec starting with 'refs/heads/' if you  
>>> want to
>>> create a new branch on the remote side.
>>
>> No.  Not if the name is the same on the local side.
>
> You're right. The documentation of git-send-pack says what you're
> saying:
>
> [...]
>
> Until you corrected me, I believed that new branches will never
> be created on the remote side unless a full ref is used. That is
> I expected that only
>
>    git push origin refs/heads/work/topic
>
> would work.
>
> I thought this would be another safety net -- kind of a reminder
> not to push the wrong branch by accident.
>
> I still like the idea, but apparently git didn't ever support what
> I thought it would.

And I even fixed the behavior to match my expectation in a patch
which made it to spearce/pu:


d869233c62688742968663c4e8b5ff20a50a5011

     push, send-pack: fix test if remote branch exists for colon-less  
refspec

     A push must fail if the remote ref does not yet exist and the  
refspec
     does not start with refs/. Remote refs must explicitly be  
created with
     their full name.

     This commit adds some tests and fixes the existence check in  
send-pack.


sp/push-refspec definitely needs some more work.

	Steffen

RE: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steffen Prohaska [mailto:prohaska@zib.de] 
> Sent: den 20 oktober 2007 10:30
> To: Johannes Schindelin
> Cc: Joakim Tjernlund; git
> Subject: Re: git push bug?
> 
> 
> On Oct 18, 2007, at 11:58 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> >
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
> >
> >> On Oct 18, 2007, at 6:21 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Seems like it is a bit too easy to make mistakes here. 
> Why can I  
> >>>> delete
> >>>> a branch with :linus but not create one with linus:linus?
> >>>
> >>> I wonder why you bother with the colon at all.  Just
> >>>
> >>> 	git push <remote> linus
> >>>
> >>> and be done with it.  The colon is only there to play 
> interesting  
> >>> games,
> >>> not something as simple as "push this branch" or "push this tag".
> >>
> >> But you need a full refspec starting with 'refs/heads/' if you  
> >> want to
> >> create a new branch on the remote side.
> >
> > No.  Not if the name is the same on the local side.
> 
> You're right. The documentation of git-send-pack says what you're
> saying:
> 
> '''
> When one or more <ref> are specified explicitly, it can be either a  
> single pattern, or a pair of such pattern separated by a colon  
> ":" (this means that a ref name cannot have a colon in it). A single  
> pattern <name> is just a shorthand for <name>:<name>
> '''
> 
> Here it says that <name> is a shorthand for <name>:<name>.
> An later it states
> 
> '''
> If <dst> does not match any remote ref, either
>     * it has to start with "refs/"; <dst> is used as the destination  
> literally in this case.
>     * <src> == <dst> and the ref that matched the <src> must not  
> exist in the set of remote refs; the ref matched <src> locally is  
> used as the name of the destination.
> '''
> 
> If <src> == <dst> then <dst> will be created even if it didn't exist.
> 
> I think the current implementation though is a bit different.
> It will created a new branch for a colon-less refspec, that is
> 
>     git push origin work/topic
> 
> will create a new ref on the remote. But
> 
>     git push origin work/topic:work/topic
> 
> will _not_.
> 
> 
> Until you corrected me, I believed that new branches will never
> be created on the remote side unless a full ref is used. That is
> I expected that only
> 
>     git push origin refs/heads/work/topic
> 
> would work.
> 
> I thought this would be another safety net -- kind of a reminder
> not to push the wrong branch by accident.
> 
> I still like the idea, but apparently git didn't ever support what
> I thought it would.
> 
> Maybe adding some command line flags making the different tasks
> explicit could help:
> 
>      git push --create origin work/new-topic
>      git push --delete origin work/old-topic
>      git push --non-standard origin refs/funny/ref

This makes much more sense than the current method, thanks.

 Jocke

Re: git push bug?

[Jan Hudec]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2743 bytes --]

On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 20:50:29 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> On den 19 oktober 2007 19:25, Johannes Schindelin [mailto:Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de] wrote:
> > It strikes me as really odd that you would _want_ to create a branch 
> > remotely, that has _never_ existed locally.
> It strikes me as really odd that a core developers like yourself
> hasn't tried to justify/explain why push works as it does.

Dscho it rarely kind to newbies.

> As I am trying to convince our dev. group here to move to git instead of subversion, I
> need to learn how git works. Now I have gotten to the push function and I need
> to know what can be done with push and how, pitfalls too. As I go along I find behavior
> that I find odd and report these to the list.
> 
>  git push <repo> v2.6.23:refs/heads/linus
> will make a tag look like a branch

That's becasue tags come in two flavors -- annotated and unannotated.
Annotated ones don't point to commits directly, but via 'tag' objects, that
contain description and usually signature.

Now git push will simply assign a remote branch whatever value you give it.
You gave it a tag, so it assigned a tag.

>  git push <repo> linus:linus
> won't let me create the remote branch linus but
>  git push <repo> linus
> will

Because in the former you are not saying whether refs/heads/linus,
refs/tags/linus or something else (the fact that heads and tags are treated
specially by git does not mean refs can't have other subdirectories -- it
can).

On the other hand in the later it resolves the ref locally and uses the same
name remotedly.

>  git push <repo> :linus
> OOPS, now I just deleted remote branch linus, no warning

Your commands are quite obvious. No need for warning. (Besides, isn't there
a reflog?)

>  git push <repo> linus:refs/head/linus
> creates a branch that is invisible(wont show in git branch -a)

It does not create a branch. It creates a ref with slightly funny name (it's
refs/heads, not refs/head).
         ^

>  git push <repo> linus:refs/heads/newbranch
> creates remote branch newbranch, but you have to know the magic words
> refs/heads/ to do it.

Because you could have wanted a tag. Or a remote. Or something completely
different, maybe because some add-on uses (eg. stgit uses refs/bases and
refs/patches, IIRC).

> Se what I mean? 

To me it all looks perfectly consistent. But maybe the documentation should
state more clearly, that push works in terms of arbitrary refs, NOT branches.
Feel free to post a documentation patch (people who just had hard time
finding something out are usually better at explaining it than old-timers who
consider it obvious).

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

RE: git push bug?

[Joakim Tjernlund]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: spearce@spearce.org [mailto:spearce@spearce.org] 
> Sent: den 19 oktober 2007 02:25
> To: Steffen Prohaska
> Cc: joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se; git
> Subject: Re: git push bug?
> 
> Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> wrote:
> > On Oct 18, 2007, at 4:50 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > >
> > ># > git push ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git linus:refs/linus
> ...
> > >error: refusing to create funny ref 'refs/linus' locally
> > >ng refs/linus funny refname
> > >error: failed to push to 'ssh://devsrv/var/git/os2kernel.git'
> ...
> > You may need to cleanup though. I'm not sure if the remote side
> > already created 'refs/linus'. The error message only indicates that
> > locally git refused to create the "funny refname".
> 
> Cute.  The error message "error: refusing to create .. locally"
> is actually coming from the remote site.  Locally here is
> actually remotely.  We *really* should change that.  Its l.169 of
> receive-pack.c, which is only running on the remote side.  :)
> 
> Anyone game to improve that error message?  Should be a pretty
> simple patch.  One of the may low-hanging fruits in Git.

Just gave it a try, using git sendmail. Hopefully it will
reach the list :)