From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] check_refname_format(): add FULLY_QUALIFIED flag
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:09:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZjDDa5PIxPCFzMhq@tanuki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240430100145.GB1279403@coredump.intra.peff.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2648 bytes --]
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 06:01:45AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 06:54:04AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 04:33:25AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
[snip]
> > > The whole ALLOW_ONELEVEL thing is a long-standing confusion, and
> > > unfortunately has made it into the hands of users via "git
> > > check-ref-format --allow-onelevel". So I think it is there to stay.
> > > Possibly we should expose this new feature as --fully-qualified or
> > > similar.
> >
> > Hm, that's really too bad. I wonder whether we should eventually start
> > to deprecate `--allow-onelevel` in favor of `--fully-qualified`. We
> > would continue to accept the flag, but remove it from our documentation
> > such that scripts start to move over. Then some day, we may replace
> > `ALLOW_ONELEVEL` with something like `ALLOW_ROOT_REF` that allows refs
> > in the root directory while honoring `is_pseudoref_syntax()`.
>
> I don't know if we could ever get rid of --allow-onelevel. If you want
> to check a branch name, say, the replacement for it is to ask about
> "refs/heads/$name". But sometimes you don't actually know how the short
> name is going to be used, but you want to make sure it's syntactically
> valid. E.g., validating a refspec may involve a name like "main" on its
> own. I suspect it would be OK in practice to just give it an arbitrary
> "refs/foo/$main", but that feels kind of hacky.
Ah, fair enough.
[snip]
> > > @@ -322,8 +331,11 @@ static int check_or_sanitize_refname(const char *refname, int flags,
> > > else
> > > return -1;
> > > }
> > > - if (!(flags & REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL) && component_count < 2)
> > > +
> > > + if (!(flags & (REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL | REFNAME_FULLY_QUALIFIED)) &&
> > > + component_count < 2)
> > > return -1; /* Refname has only one component. */
> > > +
> >
> > I first thought that we don't have to handle REFNAME_FULLY_QUALIFIED
> > here because the above should already handle it. But we can of course
> > have a single component, only, when the ref is "refs/".
>
> I hadn't really considered that case. The reason we have to handle
> FULLY_QUALIFIED here is that without it, "FETCH_HEAD" (or for that
> matter "HEAD") is forbidden as having only a single component. The
> earlier hunk only rejects bad things, so we still end up in this code.
>
> I think that "refs/" is forbidden both before and after my patch because
> it's invalid to have a zero-length component (so "foo//bar" is
> forbidden, but so is "foo/" because of the empty component on the end).a
Makes sense, thanks.
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-30 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-29 8:33 [PATCH 6/8] check_refname_format(): add FULLY_QUALIFIED flag Jeff King
2024-04-29 16:01 ` Karthik Nayak
2024-04-30 9:47 ` Jeff King
2024-04-30 10:05 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-30 4:54 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-30 10:01 ` Jeff King
2024-04-30 10:09 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2024-04-30 17:00 ` Junio C Hamano
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=ZjDDa5PIxPCFzMhq@tanuki \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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).