git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* "git push"
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2023-05-16 06:33:57 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "builtin.h"
|
2023-04-11 03:00:39 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "advice.h"
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "branch.h"
|
2017-06-14 18:07:36 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "config.h"
|
2023-03-21 06:26:03 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "environment.h"
|
2023-03-21 06:25:54 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "gettext.h"
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "refs.h"
|
2018-05-16 22:57:48 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "refspec.h"
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "run-command.h"
|
2007-05-12 15:45:53 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "remote.h"
|
2007-09-11 03:03:04 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "transport.h"
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "parse-options.h"
|
2023-04-22 20:17:14 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "pkt-line.h"
|
2023-04-22 20:17:20 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "repository.h"
|
2011-08-19 22:08:47 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "submodule.h"
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "submodule-config.h"
|
2015-08-19 15:26:46 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "send-pack.h"
|
2023-04-11 03:00:38 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "trace2.h"
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "color.h"
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char * const push_usage[] = {
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
N_("git push [<options>] [<repository> [<refspec>...]]"),
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
NULL,
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
static int push_use_color = -1;
|
|
|
|
|
static char push_colors[][COLOR_MAXLEN] = {
|
|
|
|
|
GIT_COLOR_RESET,
|
|
|
|
|
GIT_COLOR_RED, /* ERROR */
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
enum color_push {
|
|
|
|
|
PUSH_COLOR_RESET = 0,
|
|
|
|
|
PUSH_COLOR_ERROR = 1
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int parse_push_color_slot(const char *slot)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcasecmp(slot, "reset"))
|
|
|
|
|
return PUSH_COLOR_RESET;
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcasecmp(slot, "error"))
|
|
|
|
|
return PUSH_COLOR_ERROR;
|
|
|
|
|
return -1;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static const char *push_get_color(enum color_push ix)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
if (want_color_stderr(push_use_color))
|
|
|
|
|
return push_colors[ix];
|
|
|
|
|
return "";
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-08-12 13:55:55 +00:00
|
|
|
static int thin = 1;
|
2009-12-30 19:57:42 +00:00
|
|
|
static int deleterefs;
|
2007-01-19 12:49:27 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char *receivepack;
|
2010-02-24 12:50:24 +00:00
|
|
|
static int verbosity;
|
2015-12-03 13:10:35 +00:00
|
|
|
static int progress = -1;
|
|
|
|
|
static int recurse_submodules = RECURSE_SUBMODULES_DEFAULT;
|
2016-02-03 04:09:14 +00:00
|
|
|
static enum transport_family family;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
remote.c: add command line option parser for "--force-with-lease"
Update "git push" and "git send-pack" to parse this commnd line
option.
The intended sematics is:
* "--force-with-lease" alone, without specifying the details, will
protect _all_ remote refs that are going to be updated by
requiring their current value to be the same as some reasonable
default, unless otherwise specified;
* "--force-with-lease=refname", without specifying the expected
value, will protect that refname, if it is going to be updated,
by requiring its current value to be the same as some reasonable
default.
* "--force-with-lease=refname:value" will protect that refname, if
it is going to be updated, by requiring its current value to be
the same as the specified value; and
* "--no-force-with-lease" will cancel all the previous --force-with-lease on the
command line.
For now, "some reasonable default" is tentatively defined as "the
value of the remote-tracking branch we have for the ref of the
remote being updated", and it is an error if we do not have such a
remote-tracking branch. But this is known to be fragile, its use is
not yet recommended, and hopefully we will find more reasonable
default as we gain experience with this feature. The manual marks
the feature as experimental unless the expected value is specified
explicitly for this reason.
Because the command line options are parsed _before_ we know which
remote we are pushing to, there needs further processing to the
parsed data after we instantiate the transport object to:
* expand "refname" given by the user to a full refname to be
matched with the list of "struct ref" used in match_push_refs()
and set_ref_status_for_push(); and
* learning the actual local ref that is the remote-tracking branch
for the specified remote ref.
Further, some processing need to be deferred until we find the set
of remote refs and match_push_refs() returns in order to find the
ones that need to be checked after explicit ones have been processed
for "--force-with-lease" (no specific details).
These post-processing will be the topic of the next patch.
This option was originally called "cas" (for "compare and swap"),
the name which nobody liked because it was too technical. The
second attempt called it "lockref" (because it is conceptually like
pushing after taking a lock) but the word "lock" was hated because
it implied that it may reject push by others, which is not the way
this option works. This round calls it "force-with-lease". You
assume you took the lease on the ref when you fetched to decide what
the rebased history should be, and you can push back only if the
lease has not been broken.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-07-08 22:34:36 +00:00
|
|
|
static struct push_cas_option cas;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
static struct refspec rs = REFSPEC_INIT_PUSH;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
static struct string_list push_options_config = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-05 14:47:47 +00:00
|
|
|
static void refspec_append_mapped(struct refspec *refspec, const char *ref,
|
2023-02-06 23:07:53 +00:00
|
|
|
struct remote *remote, struct ref *matched)
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2019-11-26 15:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *branch_name;
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2018-05-16 22:58:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (remote->push.nr) {
|
2018-05-16 22:57:49 +00:00
|
|
|
struct refspec_item query;
|
|
|
|
|
memset(&query, 0, sizeof(struct refspec_item));
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
query.src = matched->name;
|
2018-05-16 22:58:12 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!query_refspecs(&remote->push, &query) && query.dst) {
|
2020-09-05 14:49:30 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(refspec, "%s%s:%s",
|
|
|
|
|
query.force ? "+" : "",
|
|
|
|
|
query.src, query.dst);
|
2020-09-05 14:47:47 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-12-04 00:23:35 +00:00
|
|
|
if (push_default == PUSH_DEFAULT_UPSTREAM &&
|
2019-11-26 15:18:28 +00:00
|
|
|
skip_prefix(matched->name, "refs/heads/", &branch_name)) {
|
|
|
|
|
struct branch *branch = branch_get(branch_name);
|
2013-12-04 00:23:35 +00:00
|
|
|
if (branch->merge_nr == 1 && branch->merge[0]->src) {
|
2020-09-05 14:49:30 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(refspec, "%s:%s",
|
|
|
|
|
ref, branch->merge[0]->src);
|
2020-09-05 14:47:47 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
2013-12-04 00:23:35 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-05 14:47:47 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_append(refspec, ref);
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static void set_refspecs(const char **refs, int nr, const char *repo)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
struct remote *remote = NULL;
|
|
|
|
|
struct ref *local_refs = NULL;
|
2007-05-25 05:20:56 +00:00
|
|
|
int i;
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-05-25 05:20:56 +00:00
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
|
|
|
|
|
const char *ref = refs[i];
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp("tag", ref)) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (nr <= ++i)
|
2011-02-22 23:42:11 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("tag shorthand without <tag>"));
|
2013-12-03 22:33:10 +00:00
|
|
|
ref = refs[i];
|
|
|
|
|
if (deleterefs)
|
2020-09-05 14:49:30 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(&rs, ":refs/tags/%s", ref);
|
2013-12-03 22:33:10 +00:00
|
|
|
else
|
2020-09-05 14:49:30 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(&rs, "refs/tags/%s", ref);
|
2013-12-03 22:33:10 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (deleterefs) {
|
2021-02-23 23:13:32 +00:00
|
|
|
if (strchr(ref, ':') || !*ref)
|
2013-12-03 22:33:10 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("--delete only accepts plain target ref names"));
|
2020-09-05 14:49:30 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(&rs, ":%s", ref);
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strchr(ref, ':')) {
|
2023-02-06 23:07:53 +00:00
|
|
|
struct ref *matched = NULL;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* lazily grab local_refs */
|
|
|
|
|
if (!local_refs)
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
local_refs = get_local_heads();
|
2023-02-06 23:07:53 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Does "ref" uniquely name our ref? */
|
|
|
|
|
if (count_refspec_match(ref, local_refs, &matched) != 1) {
|
|
|
|
|
refspec_append(&rs, ref);
|
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
|
/* lazily grab remote */
|
|
|
|
|
if (!remote)
|
|
|
|
|
remote = remote_get(repo);
|
|
|
|
|
if (!remote)
|
|
|
|
|
BUG("must get a remote for repo '%s'", repo);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
refspec_append_mapped(&rs, ref, remote, matched);
|
2009-12-30 19:57:42 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2020-09-05 14:47:47 +00:00
|
|
|
} else
|
|
|
|
|
refspec_append(&rs, ref);
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2023-02-06 23:07:54 +00:00
|
|
|
free_refs(local_refs);
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: error out when the "upstream" semantics does not make sense
The user can say "git push" without specifying any refspec. When using
the "upstream" semantics via the push.default configuration, the user
wants to update the "upstream" branch of the current branch, which is the
branch at a remote repository the current branch is set to integrate with,
with this command.
However, there are cases that such a "git push" that uses the "upstream"
semantics does not make sense:
- The current branch does not have branch.$name.remote configured. By
definition, "git push" that does not name where to push to will not
know where to push to. The user may explicitly say "git push $there",
but again, by definition, no branch at repository $there is set to
integrate with the current branch in this case and we wouldn't know
which remote branch to update.
- The current branch does have branch.$name.remote configured, but it
does not specify branch.$name.merge that names what branch at the
remote this branch integrates with. "git push" knows where to push in
this case (or the user may explicitly say "git push $remote" to tell us
where to push), but we do not know which remote branch to update.
- The current branch does have its remote and upstream branch configured,
but the user said "git push $there", where $there is not the remote
named by "branch.$name.remote". By definition, no branch at repository
$there is set to integrate with the current branch in this case, and
this push is not meant to update any branch at the remote repository
$there.
The first two cases were already checked correctly, but the third case was
not checked and we ended up updating the branch named branch.$name.merge
at repository $there, which was totally bogus.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-30 23:07:12 +00:00
|
|
|
static int push_url_of_remote(struct remote *remote, const char ***url_p)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
if (remote->pushurl_nr) {
|
|
|
|
|
*url_p = remote->pushurl;
|
|
|
|
|
return remote->pushurl_nr;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
*url_p = remote->url;
|
|
|
|
|
return remote->url_nr;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019-09-30 09:55:31 +00:00
|
|
|
static NORETURN void die_push_simple(struct branch *branch,
|
|
|
|
|
struct remote *remote)
|
2018-12-09 10:25:21 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* There's no point in using shorten_unambiguous_ref here,
|
|
|
|
|
* as the ambiguity would be on the remote side, not what
|
|
|
|
|
* we have locally. Plus, this is supposed to be the simple
|
|
|
|
|
* mode. If the user is doing something crazy like setting
|
|
|
|
|
* upstream to a non-branch, we should probably be showing
|
|
|
|
|
* them the big ugly fully qualified ref.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *advice_pushdefault_maybe = "";
|
|
|
|
|
const char *advice_automergesimple_maybe = "";
|
refactor skip_prefix to return a boolean
The skip_prefix() function returns a pointer to the content
past the prefix, or NULL if the prefix was not found. While
this is nice and simple, in practice it makes it hard to use
for two reasons:
1. When you want to conditionally skip or keep the string
as-is, you have to introduce a temporary variable.
For example:
tmp = skip_prefix(buf, "foo");
if (tmp)
buf = tmp;
2. It is verbose to check the outcome in a conditional, as
you need extra parentheses to silence compiler
warnings. For example:
if ((cp = skip_prefix(buf, "foo"))
/* do something with cp */
Both of these make it harder to use for long if-chains, and
we tend to use starts_with() instead. However, the first line
of "do something" is often to then skip forward in buf past
the prefix, either using a magic constant or with an extra
strlen(3) (which is generally computed at compile time, but
means we are repeating ourselves).
This patch refactors skip_prefix() to return a simple boolean,
and to provide the pointer value as an out-parameter. If the
prefix is not found, the out-parameter is untouched. This
lets you write:
if (skip_prefix(arg, "foo ", &arg))
do_foo(arg);
else if (skip_prefix(arg, "bar ", &arg))
do_bar(arg);
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-06-18 19:44:19 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *short_upstream = branch->merge[0]->src;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skip_prefix(short_upstream, "refs/heads/", &short_upstream);
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
2013-07-29 08:18:21 +00:00
|
|
|
* Don't show advice for people who explicitly set
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
* push.default.
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
if (push_default == PUSH_DEFAULT_UNSPECIFIED)
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
advice_pushdefault_maybe = _("\n"
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
"To choose either option permanently, "
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
"see push.default in 'git help config'.\n");
|
|
|
|
|
if (git_branch_track != BRANCH_TRACK_SIMPLE)
|
|
|
|
|
advice_automergesimple_maybe = _("\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"To avoid automatically configuring "
|
2022-09-28 05:58:11 +00:00
|
|
|
"an upstream branch when its name\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"won't match the local branch, see option "
|
2022-06-15 15:35:44 +00:00
|
|
|
"'simple' of branch.autoSetupMerge\n"
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
"in 'git help config'.\n");
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("The upstream branch of your current branch does not match\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"the name of your current branch. To push to the upstream branch\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"on the remote, use\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
" git push %s HEAD:%s\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"To push to the branch of the same name on the remote, use\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
2018-11-13 20:39:09 +00:00
|
|
|
" git push %s HEAD\n"
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
"%s%s"),
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
remote->name, short_upstream,
|
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches
With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are
protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in
centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push
to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do
a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options.
There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens:
a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing
remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With
the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git
will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch.
When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of
pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and
(amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD".
If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent
default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they
figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk
the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or
some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them.
When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch,
they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout
feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared
remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull
working out of the box.
The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have
the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this
example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch
at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required
for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature
branch on that same remote.
(merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it,
are separate more involved processes in this flow).
There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that
the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up
with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable
state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they
don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other
users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from
the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of
changes!)
An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to
have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the
original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch
added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically
when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even
notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'"
message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a
GUI.
Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup
of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that
will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just
wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second
users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should
both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both
situations.
Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote"
workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new
branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name
"push.default" option that makes similar assumptions.
This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the
current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking
branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local
branch name).
Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration
rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new
branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error.
With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first
user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for
the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only
branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch -
which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an
error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify
--set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them.
This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally
implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking
branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that
they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are
ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such
users are likely to prefer keeping the current default
merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to
"current".
Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing
this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases,
and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to
temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general
strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests
precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote".
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:44 +00:00
|
|
|
remote->name, advice_pushdefault_maybe,
|
|
|
|
|
advice_automergesimple_maybe);
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-05-29 19:21:49 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_detached_head_die[] =
|
|
|
|
|
N_("You are not currently on a branch.\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"To push the history leading to the current (detached HEAD)\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"state now, use\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
" git push %s HEAD:<name-of-remote-branch>\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char *get_upstream_ref(int flags, struct branch *branch, const char *remote_name)
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (branch->merge_nr == 0 && (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_AUTO_UPSTREAM)) {
|
|
|
|
|
/* if missing, assume same; set_upstream will be defined later */
|
|
|
|
|
return branch->refname;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!branch->merge_nr || !branch->merge || !branch->remote_name) {
|
|
|
|
|
const char *advice_autosetup_maybe = "";
|
|
|
|
|
if (!(flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_AUTO_UPSTREAM)) {
|
|
|
|
|
advice_autosetup_maybe = _("\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"To have this happen automatically for "
|
|
|
|
|
"branches without a tracking\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"upstream, see 'push.autoSetupRemote' "
|
|
|
|
|
"in 'git help config'.\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2011-04-02 00:55:55 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("The current branch %s has no upstream branch.\n"
|
2011-03-02 20:12:10 +00:00
|
|
|
"To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
" git push --set-upstream %s %s\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"%s"),
|
2011-03-02 20:12:10 +00:00
|
|
|
branch->name,
|
2021-05-31 19:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
remote_name,
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
branch->name,
|
|
|
|
|
advice_autosetup_maybe);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
if (branch->merge_nr != 1)
|
2011-04-02 00:55:55 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("The current branch %s has multiple upstream branches, "
|
2011-02-22 23:42:11 +00:00
|
|
|
"refusing to push."), branch->name);
|
2021-05-31 19:51:12 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return branch->merge[0]->src;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
static void setup_default_push_refspecs(int *flags, struct remote *remote)
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2021-05-31 19:51:16 +00:00
|
|
|
struct branch *branch;
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *dst;
|
2021-05-31 19:51:23 +00:00
|
|
|
int same_remote;
|
2013-05-29 19:21:50 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
switch (push_default) {
|
|
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_MATCHING:
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_append(&rs, ":");
|
2021-05-31 19:51:13 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-05-31 19:51:14 +00:00
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_NOTHING:
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("You didn't specify any refspecs to push, and "
|
|
|
|
|
"push.default is \"nothing\"."));
|
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-05-31 19:51:16 +00:00
|
|
|
branch = branch_get(NULL);
|
2021-05-31 19:51:15 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!branch)
|
|
|
|
|
die(_(message_detached_head_die), remote->name);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-05-31 19:51:20 +00:00
|
|
|
dst = branch->refname;
|
2021-05-31 19:51:24 +00:00
|
|
|
same_remote = !strcmp(remote->name, remote_for_branch(branch, NULL));
|
2021-05-31 19:51:20 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2021-05-31 19:51:14 +00:00
|
|
|
switch (push_default) {
|
|
|
|
|
default:
|
2013-01-05 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_UNSPECIFIED:
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_SIMPLE:
|
2021-05-31 19:51:20 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!same_remote)
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
if (strcmp(branch->refname, get_upstream_ref(*flags, branch, remote->name)))
|
2021-05-31 19:51:20 +00:00
|
|
|
die_push_simple(branch, remote);
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2012-04-24 07:50:03 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2011-02-16 00:54:24 +00:00
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_UPSTREAM:
|
2021-05-31 19:51:19 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!same_remote)
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("You are pushing to remote '%s', which is not the upstream of\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"your current branch '%s', without telling me what to push\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"to update which remote branch."),
|
|
|
|
|
remote->name, branch->name);
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
dst = get_upstream_ref(*flags, branch, remote->name);
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
case PUSH_DEFAULT_CURRENT:
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
break;
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
|
* this is a default push - if auto-upstream is enabled and there is
|
|
|
|
|
* no upstream defined, then set it (with options 'simple', 'upstream',
|
|
|
|
|
* and 'current').
|
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
if ((*flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_AUTO_UPSTREAM) && branch->merge_nr == 0)
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_SET_UPSTREAM;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-05-31 19:51:17 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_appendf(&rs, "%s:%s", branch->refname, dst);
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_pull_before_push[] =
|
|
|
|
|
N_("Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\n"
|
push: don't imply that integration is always required before pushing
In a narrow but common case, the user is the only author of a branch and
doesn't mind overwriting the corresponding branch on the remote. This
workflow is especially common on GitHub, GitLab, and Gerrit, which keep
a permanent record of every version of a branch that is pushed while a
pull request is open for that branch. On those platforms, force-pushing
is encouraged and is analogous to emailing a new version of a patchset.
When giving advice about divergent branches, tell the user about
`git pull`, but don't unconditionally instruct the user to do it. A less
prescriptive message will help prevent users from thinking that they are
required to create an integrated history instead of simply replacing the
previous history. Also, don't put `git pull` in an awkward
parenthetical, because `git pull` can always be used to reconcile
branches and is the normal way to do so.
Due to the difficulty of knowing which command for force-pushing is best
suited to the user's situation, no specific advice is given about
force-pushing. Instead, the user is directed to the Git documentation to
read about possible ways forward that do not involve integration.
Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-07-13 04:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
"its remote counterpart. If you want to integrate the remote changes,\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"use 'git pull' before pushing again.\n"
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
"See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_checkout_pull_push[] =
|
|
|
|
|
N_("Updates were rejected because a pushed branch tip is behind its remote\n"
|
push: don't imply that integration is always required before pushing
In a narrow but common case, the user is the only author of a branch and
doesn't mind overwriting the corresponding branch on the remote. This
workflow is especially common on GitHub, GitLab, and Gerrit, which keep
a permanent record of every version of a branch that is pushed while a
pull request is open for that branch. On those platforms, force-pushing
is encouraged and is analogous to emailing a new version of a patchset.
When giving advice about divergent branches, tell the user about
`git pull`, but don't unconditionally instruct the user to do it. A less
prescriptive message will help prevent users from thinking that they are
required to create an integrated history instead of simply replacing the
previous history. Also, don't put `git pull` in an awkward
parenthetical, because `git pull` can always be used to reconcile
branches and is the normal way to do so.
Due to the difficulty of knowing which command for force-pushing is best
suited to the user's situation, no specific advice is given about
force-pushing. Instead, the user is directed to the Git documentation to
read about possible ways forward that do not involve integration.
Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-07-13 04:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
"counterpart. If you want to integrate the remote changes, use 'git pull'\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"before pushing again.\n"
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
"See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.");
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_ref_fetch_first[] =
|
push: don't imply that integration is always required before pushing
In a narrow but common case, the user is the only author of a branch and
doesn't mind overwriting the corresponding branch on the remote. This
workflow is especially common on GitHub, GitLab, and Gerrit, which keep
a permanent record of every version of a branch that is pushed while a
pull request is open for that branch. On those platforms, force-pushing
is encouraged and is analogous to emailing a new version of a patchset.
When giving advice about divergent branches, tell the user about
`git pull`, but don't unconditionally instruct the user to do it. A less
prescriptive message will help prevent users from thinking that they are
required to create an integrated history instead of simply replacing the
previous history. Also, don't put `git pull` in an awkward
parenthetical, because `git pull` can always be used to reconcile
branches and is the normal way to do so.
Due to the difficulty of knowing which command for force-pushing is best
suited to the user's situation, no specific advice is given about
force-pushing. Instead, the user is directed to the Git documentation to
read about possible ways forward that do not involve integration.
Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-07-13 04:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
N_("Updates were rejected because the remote contains work that you do not\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"have locally. This is usually caused by another repository pushing to\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"the same ref. If you want to integrate the remote changes, use\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"'git pull' before pushing again.\n"
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
"See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.");
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_ref_already_exists[] =
|
2013-01-25 05:09:00 +00:00
|
|
|
N_("Updates were rejected because the tag already exists in the remote.");
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_ref_needs_force[] =
|
|
|
|
|
N_("You cannot update a remote ref that points at a non-commit object,\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"or update a remote ref to make it point at a non-commit object,\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"without using the '--force' option.\n");
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
static const char message_advice_ref_needs_update[] =
|
push: don't imply that integration is always required before pushing
In a narrow but common case, the user is the only author of a branch and
doesn't mind overwriting the corresponding branch on the remote. This
workflow is especially common on GitHub, GitLab, and Gerrit, which keep
a permanent record of every version of a branch that is pushed while a
pull request is open for that branch. On those platforms, force-pushing
is encouraged and is analogous to emailing a new version of a patchset.
When giving advice about divergent branches, tell the user about
`git pull`, but don't unconditionally instruct the user to do it. A less
prescriptive message will help prevent users from thinking that they are
required to create an integrated history instead of simply replacing the
previous history. Also, don't put `git pull` in an awkward
parenthetical, because `git pull` can always be used to reconcile
branches and is the normal way to do so.
Due to the difficulty of knowing which command for force-pushing is best
suited to the user's situation, no specific advice is given about
force-pushing. Instead, the user is directed to the Git documentation to
read about possible ways forward that do not involve integration.
Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-07-13 04:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
N_("Updates were rejected because the tip of the remote-tracking branch has\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"been updated since the last checkout. If you want to integrate the\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"remote changes, use 'git pull' before pushing again.\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.");
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
static void advise_pull_before_push(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_NON_FF_CURRENT) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_pull_before_push));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static void advise_checkout_pull_push(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_NON_FF_MATCHING) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_checkout_pull_push));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
static void advise_ref_already_exists(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_ALREADY_EXISTS) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
2012-12-03 03:27:51 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_ref_already_exists));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
static void advise_ref_fetch_first(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_FETCH_FIRST) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_ref_fetch_first));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static void advise_ref_needs_force(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_NEEDS_FORCE) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_ref_needs_force));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
static void advise_ref_needs_update(void)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2021-08-23 10:44:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_REF_NEEDS_UPDATE) || !advice_enabled(ADVICE_PUSH_UPDATE_REJECTED))
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
advise(_(message_advice_ref_needs_update));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
static int push_with_options(struct transport *transport, struct refspec *rs,
|
|
|
|
|
int flags)
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
int err;
|
2012-11-30 01:41:33 +00:00
|
|
|
unsigned int reject_reasons;
|
2020-04-24 14:20:08 +00:00
|
|
|
char *anon_url = transport_anonymize_url(transport->url);
|
2010-02-24 12:50:24 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2010-02-24 12:50:27 +00:00
|
|
|
transport_set_verbosity(transport, verbosity, progress);
|
2016-02-03 04:09:14 +00:00
|
|
|
transport->family = family;
|
2010-02-24 12:50:24 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
if (receivepack)
|
|
|
|
|
transport_set_option(transport,
|
|
|
|
|
TRANS_OPT_RECEIVEPACK, receivepack);
|
2013-08-12 13:55:55 +00:00
|
|
|
transport_set_option(transport, TRANS_OPT_THIN, thin ? "yes" : NULL);
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2013-07-09 18:01:06 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!is_empty_cas(&cas)) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (!transport->smart_options)
|
|
|
|
|
die("underlying transport does not support --%s option",
|
|
|
|
|
CAS_OPT_NAME);
|
|
|
|
|
transport->smart_options->cas = &cas;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010-02-24 12:50:24 +00:00
|
|
|
if (verbosity > 0)
|
2020-04-24 14:20:08 +00:00
|
|
|
fprintf(stderr, _("Pushing to %s\n"), anon_url);
|
2019-10-02 23:49:29 +00:00
|
|
|
trace2_region_enter("push", "transport_push", the_repository);
|
2018-11-10 05:48:55 +00:00
|
|
|
err = transport_push(the_repository, transport,
|
|
|
|
|
rs, flags, &reject_reasons);
|
2019-10-02 23:49:29 +00:00
|
|
|
trace2_region_leave("push", "transport_push", the_repository);
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
if (err != 0) {
|
|
|
|
|
fprintf(stderr, "%s", push_get_color(PUSH_COLOR_ERROR));
|
2020-04-24 14:20:08 +00:00
|
|
|
error(_("failed to push some refs to '%s'"), anon_url);
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
fprintf(stderr, "%s", push_get_color(PUSH_COLOR_RESET));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2009-12-03 23:31:44 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
err |= transport_disconnect(transport);
|
2020-04-24 14:20:08 +00:00
|
|
|
free(anon_url);
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!err)
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012-11-30 01:41:33 +00:00
|
|
|
if (reject_reasons & REJECT_NON_FF_HEAD) {
|
push: Provide situational hints for non-fast-forward errors
Pushing a non-fast-forward update to a remote repository will result in
an error, but the hint text doesn't provide the correct resolution in
every case. Give better resolution advice in three push scenarios:
1) If you push your current branch and it triggers a non-fast-forward
error, you should merge remote changes with 'git pull' before pushing
again.
2) If you push to a shared repository others push to, and your local
tracking branches are not kept up to date, the 'matching refs' default
will generate non-fast-forward errors on outdated branches. If this is
your workflow, the 'matching refs' default is not for you. Consider
setting the 'push.default' configuration variable to 'current' or
'upstream' to ensure only your current branch is pushed.
3) If you explicitly specify a ref that is not your current branch or
push matching branches with ':', you will generate a non-fast-forward
error if any pushed branch tip is out of date. You should checkout the
offending branch and merge remote changes before pushing again.
Teach transport.c to recognize these scenarios and configure push.c
to hint for them. If 'git push's default behavior changes or we
discover more scenarios, extension is easy. Standardize on the
advice API and add three new advice variables, 'pushNonFFCurrent',
'pushNonFFDefault', and 'pushNonFFMatching'. Setting any of these
to 'false' will disable their affiliated advice. Setting
'pushNonFastForward' to false will disable all three, thus preserving the
config option for users who already set it, but guaranteeing new
users won't disable push advice accidentally.
Based-on-patch-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Christopher Tiwald <christiwald@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-20 04:31:33 +00:00
|
|
|
advise_pull_before_push();
|
2012-11-30 01:41:33 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_NON_FF_OTHER) {
|
2013-01-05 00:02:29 +00:00
|
|
|
advise_checkout_pull_push();
|
2012-11-30 01:41:34 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_ALREADY_EXISTS) {
|
|
|
|
|
advise_ref_already_exists();
|
push: introduce REJECT_FETCH_FIRST and REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE
When we push to update an existing ref, if:
* the object at the tip of the remote is not a commit; or
* the object we are pushing is not a commit,
it won't be correct to suggest to fetch, integrate and push again,
as the old and new objects will not "merge". We should explain that
the push must be forced when there is a non-committish object is
involved in such a case.
If we do not have the current object at the tip of the remote, we do
not even know that object, when fetched, is something that can be
merged. In such a case, suggesting to pull first just like
non-fast-forward case may not be technically correct, but in
practice, most such failures are seen when you try to push your work
to a branch without knowing that somebody else already pushed to
update the same branch since you forked, so "pull first" would work
as a suggestion most of the time. And if the object at the tip is
not a commit, "pull first" will fail, without making any permanent
damage. As a side effect, it also makes the error message the user
will get during the next "push" attempt easier to understand, now
the user is aware that a non-commit object is involved.
In these cases, the current code already rejects such a push on the
client end, but we used the same error and advice messages as the
ones used when rejecting a non-fast-forward push, i.e. pull from
there and integrate before pushing again.
Introduce new rejection reasons and reword the messages
appropriately.
[jc: with help by Peff on message details]
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-01-23 21:55:30 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_FETCH_FIRST) {
|
|
|
|
|
advise_ref_fetch_first();
|
|
|
|
|
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE) {
|
|
|
|
|
advise_ref_needs_force();
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_REF_NEEDS_UPDATE) {
|
|
|
|
|
advise_ref_needs_update();
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-30 12:29:09 +00:00
|
|
|
static int do_push(int flags,
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
const struct string_list *push_options,
|
|
|
|
|
struct remote *remote)
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2007-05-12 15:45:53 +00:00
|
|
|
int i, errs;
|
2009-06-09 16:01:34 +00:00
|
|
|
const char **url;
|
|
|
|
|
int url_nr;
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
struct refspec *push_refspec = &rs;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2016-07-14 21:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
if (push_options->nr)
|
|
|
|
|
flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_OPTIONS;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!push_refspec->nr && !(flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL)) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (remote->push.nr) {
|
|
|
|
|
push_refspec = &remote->push;
|
2009-03-16 15:42:51 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!(flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
setup_default_push_refspecs(&flags, remote);
|
2007-05-12 15:45:53 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-04-07 06:04:53 +00:00
|
|
|
errs = 0;
|
push: error out when the "upstream" semantics does not make sense
The user can say "git push" without specifying any refspec. When using
the "upstream" semantics via the push.default configuration, the user
wants to update the "upstream" branch of the current branch, which is the
branch at a remote repository the current branch is set to integrate with,
with this command.
However, there are cases that such a "git push" that uses the "upstream"
semantics does not make sense:
- The current branch does not have branch.$name.remote configured. By
definition, "git push" that does not name where to push to will not
know where to push to. The user may explicitly say "git push $there",
but again, by definition, no branch at repository $there is set to
integrate with the current branch in this case and we wouldn't know
which remote branch to update.
- The current branch does have branch.$name.remote configured, but it
does not specify branch.$name.merge that names what branch at the
remote this branch integrates with. "git push" knows where to push in
this case (or the user may explicitly say "git push $remote" to tell us
where to push), but we do not know which remote branch to update.
- The current branch does have its remote and upstream branch configured,
but the user said "git push $there", where $there is not the remote
named by "branch.$name.remote". By definition, no branch at repository
$there is set to integrate with the current branch in this case, and
this push is not meant to update any branch at the remote repository
$there.
The first two cases were already checked correctly, but the third case was
not checked and we ended up updating the branch named branch.$name.merge
at repository $there, which was totally bogus.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-30 23:07:12 +00:00
|
|
|
url_nr = push_url_of_remote(remote, &url);
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
if (url_nr) {
|
|
|
|
|
for (i = 0; i < url_nr; i++) {
|
|
|
|
|
struct transport *transport =
|
|
|
|
|
transport_get(remote, url[i]);
|
2016-07-14 21:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_OPTIONS)
|
|
|
|
|
transport->push_options = push_options;
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
if (push_with_options(transport, push_refspec, flags))
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
errs++;
|
2009-08-08 07:51:08 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
|
struct transport *transport =
|
|
|
|
|
transport_get(remote, NULL);
|
2016-07-14 21:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_OPTIONS)
|
|
|
|
|
transport->push_options = push_options;
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
if (push_with_options(transport, push_refspec, flags))
|
2009-11-18 01:42:22 +00:00
|
|
|
errs++;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-04-07 06:04:53 +00:00
|
|
|
return !!errs;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-08-19 22:08:47 +00:00
|
|
|
static int option_parse_recurse_submodules(const struct option *opt,
|
|
|
|
|
const char *arg, int unset)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
int *recurse_submodules = opt->value;
|
2012-03-29 07:21:24 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
if (unset)
|
|
|
|
|
*recurse_submodules = RECURSE_SUBMODULES_OFF;
|
Doc: document push.recurseSubmodules=only
Git learned pushing submodules without pushing the superproject by
the user specifying --recurse-submodules=only through 6c656c3fe4
("submodules: add RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ONLY value", 2016-12-20) and
225e8bf778 ("push: add option to push only submodules", 2016-12-20).
For users who use this feature regularly, it is desirable to have an
equivalent configuration.
It turns out that such a configuration (push.recurseSubmodules=only) is
already supported, even though it is neither documented nor mentioned
in the commit messages, due to the way the --recurse-submodules=only
feature was implemented (a function used to parse --recurse-submodules
was updated to support "only", but that same function is used to parse
push.recurseSubmodules too). What is left is to document it and test it,
which is what this commit does.
There is a possible point of confusion when recursing into a submodule
that itself has the push.recurseSubmodules=only configuration, because
if a repository has only its submodules pushed and not itself, its
superproject can never be pushed. Therefore, treat such configurations
as being "on-demand", and print a warning message.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
2022-11-14 21:37:12 +00:00
|
|
|
else {
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(arg, "only-is-on-demand")) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (*recurse_submodules == RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ONLY) {
|
|
|
|
|
warning(_("recursing into submodule with push.recurseSubmodules=only; using on-demand instead"));
|
|
|
|
|
*recurse_submodules = RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
|
*recurse_submodules = parse_push_recurse_submodules_arg(opt->long_name, arg);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2011-08-19 22:08:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-08-19 15:26:47 +00:00
|
|
|
static void set_push_cert_flags(int *flags, int v)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
switch (v) {
|
|
|
|
|
case SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_NEVER:
|
|
|
|
|
*flags &= ~(TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_ALWAYS | TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_IF_ASKED);
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
case SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_ALWAYS:
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_ALWAYS;
|
|
|
|
|
*flags &= ~TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_IF_ASKED;
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
case SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_IF_ASKED:
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_IF_ASKED;
|
|
|
|
|
*flags &= ~TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT_ALWAYS;
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
config: add ctx arg to config_fn_t
Add a new "const struct config_context *ctx" arg to config_fn_t to hold
additional information about the config iteration operation.
config_context has a "struct key_value_info kvi" member that holds
metadata about the config source being read (e.g. what kind of config
source it is, the filename, etc). In this series, we're only interested
in .kvi, so we could have just used "struct key_value_info" as an arg,
but config_context makes it possible to add/adjust members in the future
without changing the config_fn_t signature. We could also consider other
ways of organizing the args (e.g. moving the config name and value into
config_context or key_value_info), but in my experiments, the
incremental benefit doesn't justify the added complexity (e.g. a
config_fn_t will sometimes invoke another config_fn_t but with a
different config value).
In subsequent commits, the .kvi member will replace the global "struct
config_reader" in config.c, making config iteration a global-free
operation. It requires much more work for the machinery to provide
meaningful values of .kvi, so for now, merely change the signature and
call sites, pass NULL as a placeholder value, and don't rely on the arg
in any meaningful way.
Most of the changes are performed by
contrib/coccinelle/config_fn_ctx.pending.cocci, which, for every
config_fn_t:
- Modifies the signature to accept "const struct config_context *ctx"
- Passes "ctx" to any inner config_fn_t, if needed
- Adds UNUSED attributes to "ctx", if needed
Most config_fn_t instances are easily identified by seeing if they are
called by the various config functions. Most of the remaining ones are
manually named in the .cocci patch. Manual cleanups are still needed,
but the majority of it is trivial; it's either adjusting config_fn_t
that the .cocci patch didn't catch, or adding forward declarations of
"struct config_context ctx" to make the signatures make sense.
The non-trivial changes are in cases where we are invoking a config_fn_t
outside of config machinery, and we now need to decide what value of
"ctx" to pass. These cases are:
- trace2/tr2_cfg.c:tr2_cfg_set_fl()
This is indirectly called by git_config_set() so that the trace2
machinery can notice the new config values and update its settings
using the tr2 config parsing function, i.e. tr2_cfg_cb().
- builtin/checkout.c:checkout_main()
This calls git_xmerge_config() as a shorthand for parsing a CLI arg.
This might be worth refactoring away in the future, since
git_xmerge_config() can call git_default_config(), which can do much
more than just parsing.
Handle them by creating a KVI_INIT macro that initializes "struct
key_value_info" to a reasonable default, and use that to construct the
"ctx" arg.
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-06-28 19:26:22 +00:00
|
|
|
static int git_push_config(const char *k, const char *v,
|
|
|
|
|
const struct config_context *ctx, void *cb)
|
2014-10-22 14:57:49 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *slot_name;
|
2015-02-16 06:16:19 +00:00
|
|
|
int *flags = cb;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(k, "push.followtags")) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (git_config_bool(k, v))
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_FOLLOW_TAGS;
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
|
*flags &= ~TRANSPORT_PUSH_FOLLOW_TAGS;
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
push: new config option "push.autoSetupRemote" supports "simple" push
In some "simple" centralized workflows, users expect remote tracking
branch names to match local branch names. "git push" pushes to the
remote version/instance of the branch, and "git pull" pulls any changes
to the remote branch (changes made by the same user in another place, or
by other users).
This expectation is supported by the push.default default option "simple"
which refuses a default push for a mismatching tracking branch name, and
by the new branch.autosetupmerge option, "simple", which only sets up
remote tracking for same-name remote branches.
When a new branch has been created by the user and has not yet been
pushed (and push.default is not set to "current"), the user is prompted
with a "The current branch %s has no upstream branch" error, and
instructions on how to push and add tracking.
This error is helpful in that following the advice once per branch
"resolves" the issue for that branch forever, but inconvenient in that
for the "simple" centralized workflow, this is always the right thing to
do, so it would be better to just do it.
Support this workflow with a new config setting, push.autoSetupRemote,
which will cause a default push, when there is no remote tracking branch
configured, to push to the same-name on the remote and --set-upstream.
Also add a hint offering this new option when the "The current branch %s
has no upstream branch" error is encountered, and add corresponding tests.
Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 09:56:46 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "push.autosetupremote")) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (git_config_bool(k, v))
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_AUTO_UPSTREAM;
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2015-08-19 15:26:47 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "push.gpgsign")) {
|
|
|
|
|
const char *value;
|
|
|
|
|
if (!git_config_get_value("push.gpgsign", &value)) {
|
2017-08-07 18:20:49 +00:00
|
|
|
switch (git_parse_maybe_bool(value)) {
|
2015-08-19 15:26:47 +00:00
|
|
|
case 0:
|
|
|
|
|
set_push_cert_flags(flags, SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_NEVER);
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
case 1:
|
|
|
|
|
set_push_cert_flags(flags, SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_ALWAYS);
|
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
default:
|
|
|
|
|
if (value && !strcasecmp(value, "if-asked"))
|
|
|
|
|
set_push_cert_flags(flags, SEND_PACK_PUSH_CERT_IF_ASKED);
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
2022-01-31 22:07:47 +00:00
|
|
|
return error(_("invalid value for '%s'"), k);
|
2015-08-19 15:26:47 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "push.recursesubmodules")) {
|
|
|
|
|
const char *value;
|
|
|
|
|
if (!git_config_get_value("push.recursesubmodules", &value))
|
|
|
|
|
recurse_submodules = parse_push_recurse_submodules_arg(k, value);
|
2017-06-01 00:30:49 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "submodule.recurse")) {
|
|
|
|
|
int val = git_config_bool(k, v) ?
|
|
|
|
|
RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND : RECURSE_SUBMODULES_OFF;
|
|
|
|
|
recurse_submodules = val;
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "push.pushoption")) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (!v)
|
|
|
|
|
return config_error_nonbool(k);
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
|
if (!*v)
|
|
|
|
|
string_list_clear(&push_options_config, 0);
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
|
string_list_append(&push_options_config, v);
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2018-04-21 10:10:00 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "color.push")) {
|
|
|
|
|
push_use_color = git_config_colorbool(k, v);
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
} else if (skip_prefix(k, "color.push.", &slot_name)) {
|
|
|
|
|
int slot = parse_push_color_slot(slot_name);
|
|
|
|
|
if (slot < 0)
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
|
if (!v)
|
|
|
|
|
return config_error_nonbool(k);
|
|
|
|
|
return color_parse(v, push_colors[slot]);
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
} else if (!strcmp(k, "push.useforceifincludes")) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (git_config_bool(k, v))
|
|
|
|
|
*flags |= TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE_IF_INCLUDES;
|
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
|
*flags &= ~TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE_IF_INCLUDES;
|
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
2015-02-16 06:16:19 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
config: add ctx arg to config_fn_t
Add a new "const struct config_context *ctx" arg to config_fn_t to hold
additional information about the config iteration operation.
config_context has a "struct key_value_info kvi" member that holds
metadata about the config source being read (e.g. what kind of config
source it is, the filename, etc). In this series, we're only interested
in .kvi, so we could have just used "struct key_value_info" as an arg,
but config_context makes it possible to add/adjust members in the future
without changing the config_fn_t signature. We could also consider other
ways of organizing the args (e.g. moving the config name and value into
config_context or key_value_info), but in my experiments, the
incremental benefit doesn't justify the added complexity (e.g. a
config_fn_t will sometimes invoke another config_fn_t but with a
different config value).
In subsequent commits, the .kvi member will replace the global "struct
config_reader" in config.c, making config iteration a global-free
operation. It requires much more work for the machinery to provide
meaningful values of .kvi, so for now, merely change the signature and
call sites, pass NULL as a placeholder value, and don't rely on the arg
in any meaningful way.
Most of the changes are performed by
contrib/coccinelle/config_fn_ctx.pending.cocci, which, for every
config_fn_t:
- Modifies the signature to accept "const struct config_context *ctx"
- Passes "ctx" to any inner config_fn_t, if needed
- Adds UNUSED attributes to "ctx", if needed
Most config_fn_t instances are easily identified by seeing if they are
called by the various config functions. Most of the remaining ones are
manually named in the .cocci patch. Manual cleanups are still needed,
but the majority of it is trivial; it's either adjusting config_fn_t
that the .cocci patch didn't catch, or adding forward declarations of
"struct config_context ctx" to make the signatures make sense.
The non-trivial changes are in cases where we are invoking a config_fn_t
outside of config machinery, and we now need to decide what value of
"ctx" to pass. These cases are:
- trace2/tr2_cfg.c:tr2_cfg_set_fl()
This is indirectly called by git_config_set() so that the trace2
machinery can notice the new config values and update its settings
using the tr2 config parsing function, i.e. tr2_cfg_cb().
- builtin/checkout.c:checkout_main()
This calls git_xmerge_config() as a shorthand for parsing a CLI arg.
This might be worth refactoring away in the future, since
git_xmerge_config() can call git_default_config(), which can do much
more than just parsing.
Handle them by creating a KVI_INIT macro that initializes "struct
key_value_info" to a reasonable default, and use that to construct the
"ctx" arg.
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-06-28 19:26:22 +00:00
|
|
|
return git_default_config(k, v, ctx, NULL);
|
2014-10-22 14:57:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-07-29 05:44:25 +00:00
|
|
|
int cmd_push(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
{
|
2007-09-11 03:03:04 +00:00
|
|
|
int flags = 0;
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
int tags = 0;
|
2015-08-19 15:26:46 +00:00
|
|
|
int push_cert = -1;
|
2008-04-17 11:17:20 +00:00
|
|
|
int rc;
|
2007-05-12 15:45:53 +00:00
|
|
|
const char *repo = NULL; /* default repository */
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
struct string_list push_options_cmdline = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP;
|
|
|
|
|
struct string_list *push_options;
|
2017-03-31 23:56:22 +00:00
|
|
|
const struct string_list_item *item;
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
struct remote *remote;
|
2016-07-14 21:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
struct option options[] = {
|
2010-02-24 12:50:24 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT__VERBOSITY(&verbosity),
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_STRING( 0 , "repo", &repo, N_("repository"), N_("repository")),
|
push: introduce '--branches' option
The '--all' option of git-push built-in cmd support to push all branches
(refs under refs/heads) to remote. Under the usage, a user can easlily
work in some scenarios, for example, branches synchronization and batch
upload.
The '--all' was introduced for a long time, meanwhile, git supports to
customize the storage location under "refs/". when a new git user see
the usage like, 'git push origin --all', we might feel like we're
pushing _all_ the refs instead of just branches without looking at the
documents until we found the related description of it or '--mirror'.
To ensure compatibility, we cannot rename '--all' to another name
directly, one way is, we can try to add a new option '--heads' which be
identical with the functionality of '--all' to let the user understand
the meaning of representation more clearly. Actually, We've more or less
named options this way already, for example, in 'git-show-ref' and 'git
ls-remote'.
At the same time, we fix a related issue about the wrong help
information of '--all' option in code and add some test cases in
t5523, t5543 and t5583.
Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-05-06 11:34:08 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT( 0 , "all", &flags, N_("push all branches"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_ALIAS( 0 , "branches", "all"),
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT( 0 , "mirror", &flags, N_("mirror all refs"),
|
2008-07-20 12:02:20 +00:00
|
|
|
(TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR|TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE)),
|
2015-12-14 15:23:04 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BOOL('d', "delete", &deleterefs, N_("delete refs")),
|
push: introduce '--branches' option
The '--all' option of git-push built-in cmd support to push all branches
(refs under refs/heads) to remote. Under the usage, a user can easlily
work in some scenarios, for example, branches synchronization and batch
upload.
The '--all' was introduced for a long time, meanwhile, git supports to
customize the storage location under "refs/". when a new git user see
the usage like, 'git push origin --all', we might feel like we're
pushing _all_ the refs instead of just branches without looking at the
documents until we found the related description of it or '--mirror'.
To ensure compatibility, we cannot rename '--all' to another name
directly, one way is, we can try to add a new option '--heads' which be
identical with the functionality of '--all' to let the user understand
the meaning of representation more clearly. Actually, We've more or less
named options this way already, for example, in 'git-show-ref' and 'git
ls-remote'.
At the same time, we fix a related issue about the wrong help
information of '--all' option in code and add some test cases in
t5523, t5543 and t5583.
Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-05-06 11:34:08 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BOOL( 0 , "tags", &tags, N_("push tags (can't be used with --all or --branches or --mirror)")),
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT('n' , "dry-run", &flags, N_("dry run"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_DRY_RUN),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_BIT( 0, "porcelain", &flags, N_("machine-readable output"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_PORCELAIN),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_BIT('f', "force", &flags, N_("force updates"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE),
|
Use OPT_CALLBACK and OPT_CALLBACK_F
In the codebase, there are many options which use OPTION_CALLBACK in a
plain ol' struct definition. However, we have the OPT_CALLBACK and
OPT_CALLBACK_F macros which are meant to abstract these plain struct
definitions away. These macros are useful as they semantically signal to
developers that these are just normal callback option with nothing fancy
happening.
Replace plain struct definitions of OPTION_CALLBACK with OPT_CALLBACK or
OPT_CALLBACK_F where applicable. The heavy lifting was done using the
following (disgusting) shell script:
#!/bin/sh
do_replacement () {
tr '\n' '\r' |
sed -e 's/{\s*OPTION_CALLBACK,\s*\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\s*0,\(\s*[^[:space:]}]*\)\s*}/OPT_CALLBACK(\1,\2,\3,\4,\5,\6)/g' |
sed -e 's/{\s*OPTION_CALLBACK,\s*\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\(\s*[^[:space:]}]*\)\s*}/OPT_CALLBACK_F(\1,\2,\3,\4,\5,\6,\7)/g' |
tr '\r' '\n'
}
for f in $(git ls-files \*.c)
do
do_replacement <"$f" >"$f.tmp"
mv "$f.tmp" "$f"
done
The result was manually inspected and then reformatted to match the
style of the surrounding code. Finally, using
`git grep OPTION_CALLBACK \*.c`, leftover results which were not handled
by the script were manually transformed.
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-28 08:36:28 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_CALLBACK_F(0, CAS_OPT_NAME, &cas, N_("<refname>:<expect>"),
|
|
|
|
|
N_("require old value of ref to be at this value"),
|
|
|
|
|
PARSE_OPT_OPTARG | PARSE_OPT_LITERAL_ARGHELP, parseopt_push_cas_option),
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT(0, TRANS_OPT_FORCE_IF_INCLUDES, &flags,
|
|
|
|
|
N_("require remote updates to be integrated locally"),
|
|
|
|
|
TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE_IF_INCLUDES),
|
2020-04-27 06:44:08 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_CALLBACK(0, "recurse-submodules", &recurse_submodules, "(check|on-demand|no)",
|
|
|
|
|
N_("control recursive pushing of submodules"), option_parse_recurse_submodules),
|
2018-02-09 11:02:10 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BOOL_F( 0 , "thin", &thin, N_("use thin pack"), PARSE_OPT_NOCOMPLETE),
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_STRING( 0 , "receive-pack", &receivepack, "receive-pack", N_("receive pack program")),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_STRING( 0 , "exec", &receivepack, "receive-pack", N_("receive pack program")),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_BIT('u', "set-upstream", &flags, N_("set upstream for git pull/status"),
|
2010-01-16 21:45:31 +00:00
|
|
|
TRANSPORT_PUSH_SET_UPSTREAM),
|
2012-08-20 12:32:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &progress, N_("force progress reporting")),
|
|
|
|
|
OPT_BIT(0, "prune", &flags, N_("prune locally removed refs"),
|
2012-02-22 22:43:41 +00:00
|
|
|
TRANSPORT_PUSH_PRUNE),
|
2013-01-13 05:17:03 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT(0, "no-verify", &flags, N_("bypass pre-push hook"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_NO_HOOK),
|
2013-03-04 20:09:50 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT(0, "follow-tags", &flags, N_("push missing but relevant tags"),
|
|
|
|
|
TRANSPORT_PUSH_FOLLOW_TAGS),
|
Use OPT_CALLBACK and OPT_CALLBACK_F
In the codebase, there are many options which use OPTION_CALLBACK in a
plain ol' struct definition. However, we have the OPT_CALLBACK and
OPT_CALLBACK_F macros which are meant to abstract these plain struct
definitions away. These macros are useful as they semantically signal to
developers that these are just normal callback option with nothing fancy
happening.
Replace plain struct definitions of OPTION_CALLBACK with OPT_CALLBACK or
OPT_CALLBACK_F where applicable. The heavy lifting was done using the
following (disgusting) shell script:
#!/bin/sh
do_replacement () {
tr '\n' '\r' |
sed -e 's/{\s*OPTION_CALLBACK,\s*\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\s*0,\(\s*[^[:space:]}]*\)\s*}/OPT_CALLBACK(\1,\2,\3,\4,\5,\6)/g' |
sed -e 's/{\s*OPTION_CALLBACK,\s*\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\([^,]*\),\(\s*[^[:space:]}]*\)\s*}/OPT_CALLBACK_F(\1,\2,\3,\4,\5,\6,\7)/g' |
tr '\r' '\n'
}
for f in $(git ls-files \*.c)
do
do_replacement <"$f" >"$f.tmp"
mv "$f.tmp" "$f"
done
The result was manually inspected and then reformatted to match the
style of the surrounding code. Finally, using
`git grep OPTION_CALLBACK \*.c`, leftover results which were not handled
by the script were manually transformed.
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-28 08:36:28 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_CALLBACK_F(0, "signed", &push_cert, "(yes|no|if-asked)", N_("GPG sign the push"),
|
|
|
|
|
PARSE_OPT_OPTARG, option_parse_push_signed),
|
2015-02-16 06:12:04 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_BIT(0, "atomic", &flags, N_("request atomic transaction on remote side"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_ATOMIC),
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_STRING_LIST('o', "push-option", &push_options_cmdline, N_("server-specific"), N_("option to transmit")),
|
2023-07-18 21:34:33 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_IPVERSION(&family),
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
OPT_END()
|
|
|
|
|
};
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2011-02-24 14:30:19 +00:00
|
|
|
packet_trace_identity("push");
|
2015-02-16 06:13:25 +00:00
|
|
|
git_config(git_push_config, &flags);
|
2009-05-23 18:53:12 +00:00
|
|
|
argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, push_usage, 0);
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
push_options = (push_options_cmdline.nr
|
|
|
|
|
? &push_options_cmdline
|
|
|
|
|
: &push_options_config);
|
2015-08-19 15:26:47 +00:00
|
|
|
set_push_cert_flags(&flags, push_cert);
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2009-12-30 19:57:42 +00:00
|
|
|
if (deleterefs && (tags || (flags & (TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL | TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))))
|
push: introduce '--branches' option
The '--all' option of git-push built-in cmd support to push all branches
(refs under refs/heads) to remote. Under the usage, a user can easlily
work in some scenarios, for example, branches synchronization and batch
upload.
The '--all' was introduced for a long time, meanwhile, git supports to
customize the storage location under "refs/". when a new git user see
the usage like, 'git push origin --all', we might feel like we're
pushing _all_ the refs instead of just branches without looking at the
documents until we found the related description of it or '--mirror'.
To ensure compatibility, we cannot rename '--all' to another name
directly, one way is, we can try to add a new option '--heads' which be
identical with the functionality of '--all' to let the user understand
the meaning of representation more clearly. Actually, We've more or less
named options this way already, for example, in 'git-show-ref' and 'git
ls-remote'.
At the same time, we fix a related issue about the wrong help
information of '--all' option in code and add some test cases in
t5523, t5543 and t5583.
Signed-off-by: Teng Long <dyroneteng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-05-06 11:34:08 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--delete", "--all/--branches/--mirror/--tags");
|
2009-12-30 19:57:42 +00:00
|
|
|
if (deleterefs && argc < 2)
|
2011-02-22 23:42:11 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("--delete doesn't make sense without any refs"));
|
2009-12-30 19:57:42 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
if (recurse_submodules == RECURSE_SUBMODULES_CHECK)
|
|
|
|
|
flags |= TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_CHECK;
|
|
|
|
|
else if (recurse_submodules == RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND)
|
|
|
|
|
flags |= TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND;
|
2016-12-19 18:25:33 +00:00
|
|
|
else if (recurse_submodules == RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ONLY)
|
|
|
|
|
flags |= TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ONLY;
|
2015-11-17 11:05:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
if (tags)
|
2018-05-16 22:58:16 +00:00
|
|
|
refspec_append(&rs, "refs/tags/*");
|
2007-11-05 03:35:37 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (argc > 0) {
|
|
|
|
|
repo = argv[0];
|
push: use remote.$name.push as a refmap
Since f2690487 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), we stopped taking a non-storing refspec given on the
command line of "git fetch" literally, and instead started mapping
it via remote.$name.fetch refspecs. This allows
$ git fetch origin master
from the 'origin' repository, which is configured with
[remote "origin"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
to update refs/remotes/origin/master with the result, as if the
command line were
$ git fetch origin +master:refs/remotes/origin/master
to reduce surprises and improve usability. Before that change, a
refspec on the command line without a colon was only to fetch the
history and leave the result in FETCH_HEAD, without updating the
remote-tracking branches.
When you are simulating a fetch from you by your mothership with a
push by you into your mothership, instead of having:
[remote "satellite"]
fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on the mothership repository and running:
mothership$ git fetch satellite
you would have:
[remote "mothership"]
push = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/satellite/*
on your satellite machine, and run:
satellite$ git push mothership
Because we so far did not make the corresponding change to the push
side, this command:
satellite$ git push mothership master
does _not_ allow you on the satellite to only push 'master' out but
still to the usual destination (i.e. refs/remotes/satellite/master).
Implement the logic to map an unqualified refspec given on the
command line via the remote.$name.push refspec. This will bring a
bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-03 23:41:15 +00:00
|
|
|
set_refspecs(argv + 1, argc - 1, repo);
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
2007-05-25 05:20:56 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
remote = pushremote_get(repo);
|
|
|
|
|
if (!remote) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (repo)
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("bad repository '%s'"), repo);
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("No configured push destination.\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"Either specify the URL from the command-line or configure a remote repository using\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
" git remote add <name> <url>\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"and then push using the remote name\n"
|
|
|
|
|
"\n"
|
|
|
|
|
" git push <name>\n"));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (remote->mirror)
|
|
|
|
|
flags |= (TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR|TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (tags)
|
2022-01-05 20:02:16 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--all", "--tags");
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
if (argc >= 2)
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("--all can't be combined with refspecs"));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
if (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR) {
|
|
|
|
|
if (tags)
|
2022-01-05 20:02:16 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--mirror", "--tags");
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
if (argc >= 2)
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("--mirror can't be combined with refspecs"));
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
if ((flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL) && (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))
|
2022-01-05 20:02:16 +00:00
|
|
|
die(_("options '%s' and '%s' cannot be used together"), "--all", "--mirror");
|
2019-09-02 18:08:28 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2020-10-03 12:10:45 +00:00
|
|
|
if (!is_empty_cas(&cas) && (flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE_IF_INCLUDES))
|
|
|
|
|
cas.use_force_if_includes = 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
for_each_string_list_item(item, push_options)
|
2016-07-14 21:49:47 +00:00
|
|
|
if (strchr(item->string, '\n'))
|
|
|
|
|
die(_("push options must not have new line characters"));
|
|
|
|
|
|
2020-09-30 12:29:09 +00:00
|
|
|
rc = do_push(flags, push_options, remote);
|
2017-10-23 11:44:49 +00:00
|
|
|
string_list_clear(&push_options_cmdline, 0);
|
|
|
|
|
string_list_clear(&push_options_config, 0);
|
2008-04-17 11:17:20 +00:00
|
|
|
if (rc == -1)
|
2007-11-09 23:32:25 +00:00
|
|
|
usage_with_options(push_usage, options);
|
2008-04-17 11:17:20 +00:00
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
|
return rc;
|
git builtin "push"
This adds a builtin "push" command, which is largely just a C'ification of
the "git-push.sh" script.
Now, the reason I did it as a built-in is partly because it's yet another
step on relying less on shell, but it's actually mostly because I've
wanted to be able to push to _multiple_ repositories, and the most obvious
and simplest interface for that would seem be to just have a "remotes"
file that has multiple URL entries.
(For "pull", having multiple entries should either just select the first
one, or you could fall back on the others on failure - your choice).
And quite frankly, it just became too damn messy to do that in shell.
Besides, we actually have a fair amount of infrastructure in C, so it just
wasn't that hard to do.
Of course, this is almost totally untested. It probably doesn't work for
anything but the one trial I threw at it. "Simple" doesn't necessarily
mean "obviously correct".
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-04-30 04:22:49 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|