From: chris <jugg@hotmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: error with $ git push origin HEAD:newbranch
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 15:34:26 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <loom.20110510T153328-584@post.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20110506170204.GA16576@sigill.intra.peff.net
Jeff King <peff <at> peff.net> writes:
>
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 02:16:03AM +0000, chris wrote:
>
> > Personally, I would prefer that git-push work on branches by default[1],
> > providing shortcuts for pushing tag[2] refs and remote branch[3] refs,
> > while all other ref types must be called out explicitly. Creating new refs
> > isn't destructive, so it seems these could be supported without concern.
> >
> > 1. $ git push origin SHA1:branch1
> > => $ git push origin SHA1:refs/heads/branch1
> >
> > 2. $ git push origin tag SHA1:tagname
> > => $ git push origin SHA1:refs/tags/tagname
> >
> > 3. $ git push origin SHA1:upstream/branch2
> > => $ git push origin SHA1:refs/remotes/upstream/branch2
>
> In (3), how do you differentiate between the branch
> "refs/heads/upstream/branch2" and the remote tracking branch
> "refs/remotes/upstream/branches"?
I was just taking a queue from the documentation:
--
"git push origin master:satellite/master dev:satellite/dev
Use the source ref that matches master (e.g. refs/heads/master) to update the
ref that matches satellite/master (most probably refs/remotes/satellite/master)
in the origin repository, then do the same for dev and satellite/dev."
--
Of course the documentation there is meaninging that
refs/remotes/satellite/master already exists and that there is no conflicting
refs/heads/satellite/master.
Probably what I need to do is better understand the "guess work" git-push
already does before trying to "improve" it. So, based on this thread and the
documentation, the following holds true:
$ git push origin HEAD:newbranch
is valid only if HEAD contains a branch ref pointer. Otherwise, if the LHS of
the refspec is not a known ref type, the RHS must always be explicit when
pushing a new ref. If the LHS is a known ref type, then the same ref type is
used for the RHS of the refspec - also the RHS becomes optional in such a case
and the LHS name will be used if the RHS was omitted.
If that is a correct summary (something missing?), then as is, there is little
point in anything but explicit specification of the RHS of the refspec when
pushing a new ref.
And given that "$ git push remote tag <refspec>" syntax seems to be outdated, I
don't see any benefit to my proposed set of shortcuts for pushing new refs.
So, thanks Peff for the informative responses, they helped bring my
understanding up a notch.
chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-10 15:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-05 8:47 error with $ git push origin HEAD:newbranch chris
2011-05-05 9:37 ` Jeff King
2011-05-05 10:06 ` chris
2011-05-05 10:59 ` Jeff King
2011-05-06 2:16 ` chris
2011-05-06 4:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-05-06 6:35 ` chris
2011-05-06 17:02 ` Jeff King
2011-05-10 15:34 ` chris [this message]
2011-05-10 19:47 ` Jeff King
2011-05-11 10:10 ` chris
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=loom.20110510T153328-584@post.gmane.org \
--to=jugg@hotmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/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).