From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] refs: check refnames as fully qualified when resolving
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 13:55:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240503175553.GG3631237@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZjDVLAKA0_4pTAS7@tanuki>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 01:25:32PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > So this is where I will show my ignorance of reftables. I assume it
> > still has to implement FETCH_HEAD as a file (since it holds extra data).
> > But does it do the same for other names outside of "refs/"? I am
> > assuming not in the paragraph below.
>
> No, that's why we originally introduced the "special refs" syntax, as
> defined in gitglossary(7). There are only two files that behave like
> refs, but circumvent the ref backend: FETCH_HEAD and MERGE_HEAD. Both of
> these have special syntax and carry additional metadata, and as such
> they cannot be stored generically in a ref backend.
>
> All other root refs are stored via the ref backend.
OK, that matches what I guessed based on the existence of special refs. ;)
Thanks for confirming.
Part of me does wonder if things would be simpler if ref backends only
handled refs/*, and pseudo/special/root refs remained as their own thing
in the filesystem. They're a limited set, so we don't really care about
scaling in the same way. And their point is to be somewhat ephemeral, so
even if you wanted to be clever with a replicated database-backed refs
store, you probably don't care if CHERRY_PICK_HEAD goes away.
And it's not clear to me what the path forward is for scripts which poke
at .git/* to determine repo state. For example, I think git-prompt.sh
looks at CHERRY_PICK_HEAD and REVERT_HEAD to decide what we're doing.
Maybe we just roll all of that into a command which returns all details
of the repo state?
> > So I think dropping REFFILES it would still pass, but we are not really
> > testing anything that interesting for reftables. That said, I would be
> > OK dropping the REFFILES in the name of simplicity and just documenting
> > it in the commit message.
>
> Yeah, I'd prefer to drop it. We should only specify the REFFILES prereq
> as sparingly as possible to ensure that behaviour is as consistent as
> possible across the implementations.
Makes sense. I'll change that for my next re-roll (which probably won't
be until next week, as I'll be offline for a bit).
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-03 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-29 8:35 [PATCH 8/8] refs: check refnames as fully qualified when resolving Jeff King
2024-04-30 4:54 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-04-30 10:41 ` Jeff King
2024-04-30 11:25 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-05-03 17:55 ` Jeff King [this message]
2024-05-06 6:22 ` Patrick Steinhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240503175553.GG3631237@coredump.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).