Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 1/3] for-each-ref: let upstream/push optionally report the remote name




Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:

> This patch offers the new suffix :remote for the upstream and for the
> push atoms, allowing to show exactly that.

Has the design changed since this description and examples were
written?  The documentation talks about ":remote-name".  I suspect
calling this ":remote" might be less hassle, as we do not have to
vet the current vocabulary to see if "remote-name" is the right way
to name a multi-word modifer (as opposed to "remotename", or
"remoteName", or "remote_name", or...).

> 	...
>
> 	$ git for-each-ref \
> 		--format='%(upstream) %(upstream:remote) %(push:remote)' \
> 		refs/heads/master

> diff --git a/Documentation/git-for-each-ref.txt b/Documentation/git-for-each-ref.txt
> index 66b4e0a4050..776368ee531 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-for-each-ref.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-for-each-ref.txt
> @@ -140,17 +140,19 @@ upstream::

Aside from "':remote-name'?  Do we really want that?" issue I
already mentioned, the changes to this file look sensible.

> diff --git a/ref-filter.c b/ref-filter.c
> index bc591f4f3de..58d53c09390 100644
> --- a/ref-filter.c
> +++ b/ref-filter.c
> @@ -76,7 +76,9 @@ static struct used_atom {
>  		char color[COLOR_MAXLEN];
>  		struct align align;
>  		struct {
> -			enum { RR_REF, RR_TRACK, RR_TRACKSHORT } option;
> +			enum {
> +				RR_REF, RR_TRACK, RR_TRACKSHORT, RR_REMOTE_NAME
> +			} option;
>  			struct refname_atom refname;
>  			unsigned int nobracket : 1;
>  		} remote_ref;
> @@ -156,6 +158,8 @@ static void remote_ref_atom_parser(const struct ref_format *format, struct used_
>  			atom->u.remote_ref.option = RR_TRACKSHORT;
>  		else if (!strcmp(s, "nobracket"))
>  			atom->u.remote_ref.nobracket = 1;
> +		else if (!strcmp(s, "remote-name"))
> +			atom->u.remote_ref.option = RR_REMOTE_NAME;
>  		else {
>  			atom->u.remote_ref.option = RR_REF;
>  			refname_atom_parser_internal(&atom->u.remote_ref.refname,
> @@ -1247,6 +1251,15 @@ static void fill_remote_ref_details(struct used_atom *atom, const char *refname,
>  			*s = ">";
>  		else
>  			*s = "<>";
> +	} else if (atom->u.remote_ref.option == RR_REMOTE_NAME) {
> +		int explicit;
> +		const char *remote = starts_with(atom->name, "push") ?
> +			pushremote_for_branch(branch, &explicit) :
> +			remote_for_branch(branch, &explicit);

I think "int explicit = 0;" is needed, as pushremote_for_branch()
does seem to expect that the "explicit" return parameter is
initialized by the caller.

> +		if (explicit)
> +			*s = xstrdup(remote);
> +		else
> +			*s = "";

This one is debatable.  For the user of "push" who wants to learn
where the branch is pushed to, the choice this patch makes is not
useful (i.e. such a user does not care where the definition comes
from; s/he only wants to know where the push goes).  For the user of
"git config" who wants to know how pushremote is configured, and
does not want to accept the fallback to remote, the behaviour of
this patch is useful.  I have a mild suspicion that majority of
users who would want to use this feature would fall into the former
category, i.e. users of "push", rather than the latter, i.e.
debuggers of their config files, and if that is true, we can drop
the whole "explicit" business to simplify the code and get a more
useful behaviour at the same time ;-)

> @@ -1364,9 +1377,13 @@ static void populate_value(struct ref_array_item *ref)
>  				continue;
>  			branch = branch_get(branch_name);
>  
> -			refname = branch_get_push(branch, NULL);
> -			if (!refname)
> -				continue;
> +			if (starts_with(name, "push:remote-"))

I am not sure what is going on here.  

Are we expecting "push:remote-name" here, or anticipating
"push:remote-bar" can also be given or what?

> +				refname = NULL;
> +			else {
> +				refname = branch_get_push(branch, NULL);
> +				if (!refname)
> +					continue;
> +			}
>  			fill_remote_ref_details(atom, refname, branch, &v->s);
>  			continue;
>  		} else if (starts_with(name, "color:")) {