1
0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git synced 2024-07-02 15:48:44 +00:00
Commit Graph

16 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Junio C Hamano
6789275d37 tests: teach callers of test_i18ngrep to use test_grep
They are equivalents and the former still exists, so as long as the
only change this commit makes are to rewrite test_i18ngrep to
test_grep, there won't be any new bug, even if there still are
callers of test_i18ngrep remaining in the tree, or when merged to
other topics that add new uses of test_i18ngrep.

This patch was produced more or less with

    git grep -l -e 'test_i18ngrep ' 't/t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh' |
    xargs perl -p -i -e 's/test_i18ngrep /test_grep /'

and a good way to sanity check the result yourself is to run the
above in a checkout of c4603c1c (test framework: further deprecate
test_i18ngrep, 2023-10-31) and compare the resulting working tree
contents with the result of applying this patch to the same commit.
You'll see that test_i18ngrep in a few t/lib-*.sh files corrected,
in addition to the manual reproduction.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2023-11-02 17:13:44 +09:00
Tao Klerks
05d57750c6 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 11:20:55 -07:00
Tao Klerks
8a649be7e8 push: default to single remote even when not named origin
With "push.default=current" configured, a simple "git push" will push to
the same-name branch on the current branch's branch.<name>.pushRemote, or
remote.pushDefault, or origin. If none of these are defined, the push will
fail with error "fatal: No configured push destination".

The same "default to origin if no config" behavior applies with
"push.default=matching".

Other commands use "origin" as a default when there are multiple options,
but default to the single remote when there is only one - for example,
"git checkout <something>". This "assume the single remote if there is
only one" behavior is more friendly/useful than a defaulting behavior
that only uses the name "origin" no matter what.

Update "git push" to also default to the single remote (and finally fall
back to "origin" as default if there are several), for
"push.default=current" and for other current and future remote-defaulting
push behaviors.

This change also modifies the behavior of ls-remote in a consistent way,
so defaulting not only supplies 'origin', but any single configured remote
also.

Document the change in behavior, correct incorrect assumptions in related
tests, and add test cases reflecting this new single-remote-defaulting
behavior.

Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2022-04-29 11:20:55 -07:00
Johannes Schindelin
3ac8f6301e t55[23]*: adjust the references to the default branch name "main"
Carefully excluding t5526, which sees independent development elsewhere
at the time of writing, we use `main` as the default branch name in
t55[23]*. This trick was performed via

	$ (cd t &&
	   sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \
		-e 's/Master/Main/g' -e 's/naster/nain/g' -- \
		t55[23]*.sh &&
	   git checkout HEAD -- t5526\*)

Note that t5533 contains a variation of the name `master` (`naster`)
that we rename here, too.

This commit allows us to define
`GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main` for that range of tests.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 15:44:18 -08:00
Johannes Schindelin
334afbc76f tests: mark tests relying on the current default for init.defaultBranch
In addition to the manual adjustment to let the `linux-gcc` CI job run
the test suite with `master` and then with `main`, this patch makes sure
that GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME is set in all test scripts
that currently rely on the initial branch name being `master by default.

To determine which test scripts to mark up, the first step was to
force-set the default branch name to `master` in

- all test scripts that contain the keyword `master`,

- t4211, which expects `t/t4211/history.export` with a hard-coded ref to
  initialize the default branch,

- t5560 because it sources `t/t556x_common` which uses `master`,

- t8002 and t8012 because both source `t/annotate-tests.sh` which also
  uses `master`)

This trick was performed by this command:

	$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/\(test-lib\|lib-\(bash\|cvs\|git-svn\)\|gitweb-lib\)\.sh$/i\
	GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
	export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
	' $(git grep -l master t/t[0-9]*.sh) \
	t/t4211*.sh t/t5560*.sh t/t8002*.sh t/t8012*.sh

After that, careful, manual inspection revealed that some of the test
scripts containing the needle `master` do not actually rely on a
specific default branch name: either they mention `master` only in a
comment, or they initialize that branch specificially, or they do not
actually refer to the current default branch. Therefore, the
aforementioned modification was undone in those test scripts thusly:

	$ git checkout HEAD -- \
		t/t0027-auto-crlf.sh t/t0060-path-utils.sh \
		t/t1011-read-tree-sparse-checkout.sh \
		t/t1305-config-include.sh t/t1309-early-config.sh \
		t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh t/t1450-fsck.sh \
		t/t2024-checkout-dwim.sh \
		t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh \
		t/t3040-subprojects-basic.sh t/t3301-notes.sh \
		t/t3308-notes-merge.sh t/t3423-rebase-reword.sh \
		t/t3436-rebase-more-options.sh \
		t/t4015-diff-whitespace.sh t/t4257-am-interactive.sh \
		t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh t/t5401-update-hooks.sh \
		t/t5511-refspec.sh t/t5526-fetch-submodules.sh \
		t/t5529-push-errors.sh t/t5530-upload-pack-error.sh \
		t/t5548-push-porcelain.sh \
		t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh \
		t/t5572-pull-submodule.sh t/t5608-clone-2gb.sh \
		t/t5614-clone-submodules-shallow.sh \
		t/t7508-status.sh t/t7606-merge-custom.sh \
		t/t9302-fast-import-unpack-limit.sh

We excluded one set of test scripts in these commands, though: the range
of `git p4` tests. The reason? `git p4` stores the (foreign) remote
branch in the branch called `p4/master`, which is obviously not the
default branch. Manual analysis revealed that only five of these tests
actually require a specific default branch name to pass; They were
modified thusly:

	$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/lib-git-p4\.sh$/i\
	GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
	export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
	' t/t980[0167]*.sh t/t9811*.sh

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-11-19 15:44:17 -08:00
Johannes Schindelin
4d04658d8b send-pack/transport-helper: avoid mentioning a particular branch
When trying to push all matching branches, but none match, we offer a
message suggesting to push the `master` branch.

However, we want to step away from making that branch any more special
than any other branch, so let's reword that message to mention no branch
in particular.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-06-24 09:14:21 -07:00
Elijah Newren
7a40cf1553 Fix spelling errors in comments of testcases
Reported-by: Jens Schleusener <Jens.Schleusener@fossies.org>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2019-11-10 16:00:54 +09:00
Dennis Kaarsemaker
b284495e93 push: test pushing ambiguously named branches
Signed-off-by: Dennis Kaarsemaker <dennis@kaarsemaker.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-10-31 14:11:22 -07:00
Kyle J. McKay
ce026cc7e2 t5528: do not fail with FreeBSD shell
The FreeBSD shell converts this expression:

  git ${1:+-c push.default="$1"} push

to this when "$1" is not empty:

  git "-c push.default=$1" push

which causes git to fail.  To avoid this we simply break up the
expansion into two parts so that the whitespace which creates
two arguments instead of one is outside the ${...} like so:

  git ${1:+-c} ${1:+push.default="$1"} push

This has the desired effect on all platforms allowing the test
to pass on FreeBSD.

Signed-off-by: Kyle J. McKay <mackyle@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-03-10 15:23:28 -07:00
Jeff King
00a6fa0720 push: truly use "simple" as default, not "upstream"
The plan for the push.default transition had all along been
to use the "simple" method rather than "upstream" as a
default if the user did not specify their own push.default
value. Commit 11037ee (push: switch default from "matching"
to "simple", 2013-01-04) tried to implement that by moving
PUSH_DEFAULT_UNSPECIFIED in our switch statement to
fall-through to the PUSH_DEFAULT_SIMPLE case.

When the commit that became 11037ee was originally written,
that would have been enough. We would fall through to
calling setup_push_upstream() with the "simple" parameter
set to 1. However, it was delayed for a while until we were
ready to make the transition in Git 2.0.

And in the meantime, commit ed2b182 (push: change `simple`
to accommodate triangular workflows, 2013-06-19) threw a
monkey wrench into the works. That commit drops the "simple"
parameter to setup_push_upstream, and instead checks whether
the global "push_default" is PUSH_DEFAULT_SIMPLE. This is
right when the user has explicitly configured push.default
to simple, but wrong when we are a fall-through for the
"unspecified" case.

We never noticed because our push.default tests do not cover
the case of the variable being totally unset; they only
check the "simple" behavior itself.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-11-30 18:11:25 -08:00
Ramkumar Ramachandra
6e1696b7c4 t/t5528-push-default: test pushdefault workflows
Introduce test_pushdefault_workflows(), and test that all push.default
modes work with central and triangular workflows as expected.

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-06-24 10:19:25 -07:00
Ramkumar Ramachandra
396243fa47 t/t5528-push-default: generalize test_push_*
The setup creates two bare repositories: repo1 and repo2, but
test_push_commit() hard-codes checking in repo1 for the actual output.
Generalize it and its caller, test_push_success(), to optionally accept
a third argument to specify the name of the repository to check for
actual output.  We will use this in the next patch.

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-06-24 10:18:41 -07:00
Ramkumar Ramachandra
3cb8a5ff17 t/t5528-push-default: remove redundant test_config lines
The line

  test_config push.default upstream

appears unnecessarily in two tests, as the final test_push_failure sets
push.default before pushing anyway.

Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-06-19 19:11:34 -07:00
Matthieu Moy
b55e677522 push: introduce new push.default mode "simple"
When calling "git push" without argument, we want to allow Git to do
something simple to explain and safe. push.default=matching is unsafe
when used to push to shared repositories, and hard to explain to
beginners in some contexts. It is debatable whether 'upstream' or
'current' is the safest or the easiest to explain, so introduce a new
mode called 'simple' that is the intersection of them: push to the
upstream branch, but only if it has the same name remotely. If not, give
an error that suggests the right command to push explicitely to
'upstream' or 'current'.

A question is whether to allow pushing when no upstream is configured. An
argument in favor of allowing the push is that it makes the new mode work
in more cases. On the other hand, refusing to push when no upstream is
configured encourages the user to set the upstream, which will be
beneficial on the next pull. Lacking better argument, we chose to deny
the push, because it will be easier to change in the future if someone
shows us wrong.

Original-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-04-24 15:22:16 -07:00
Matthieu Moy
321e75c5dc t5528-push-default.sh: add helper functions
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-04-24 12:11:58 -07:00
Junio C Hamano
135dadef71 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>
2012-04-05 13:35:57 -07:00