Across only three files, comments and a single function name used
'commitish' rather than 'commit-ish' or 'committish' as the spelling.
The git glossary accepts a hyphen or a double-t, but not a single-t.
Despite the typo in a translation file, none of the typos appear in
user-visible locations.
Signed-off-by: Pi Fisher <Pi.L.D.Fisher@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When we introduced replace_each_worktree_head_symref() in 70999e9cec
(branch -m: update all per-worktree HEADs, 2016-03-27), we implemented a
best effort approach.
If we are asked to rename a branch that is simultaneously checked out in
multiple worktrees, we try to update all of those worktrees. If we fail
updating any of them, we die() as a signal that something has gone
wrong. However, at this point, the branch ref has already been renamed
and also updated the HEADs of the successfully updated worktrees.
Despite returning an error, we do not try to rollback those changes.
Let's add a test to notice if we change this behavior in the future.
In next commits we will change replace_each_worktree_head_symref() to
work more closely with its only caller, copy_or_rename_branch(). Let's
move the former closer to its caller, to facilitate those changes.
Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Introduce a helper to see if a branch is already being worked on
(hence should not be newly checked out in a working tree), which
performs much better than the existing find_shared_symref() to
replace many uses of the latter.
* ds/branch-checked-out:
branch: drop unused worktrees variable
fetch: stop passing around unused worktrees variable
branch: fix branch_checked_out() leaks
branch: use branch_checked_out() when deleting refs
fetch: use new branch_checked_out() and add tests
branch: check for bisects and rebases
branch: add branch_checked_out() helper
The validate_new_branchname() method contains a check to see if a branch
is checked out in any non-bare worktree. This is intended to prevent a
force push that will mess up an existing checkout. This helper is not
suitable to performing just that check, because the method will die()
when the branch is checked out instead of returning an error code.
Create a new branch_checked_out() helper that performs the most basic
form of this check. To ensure we can call branch_checked_out() in a loop
with good performance, do a single preparation step that iterates over
all worktrees and stores their current HEAD branches in a strmap. The
branch_checked_out() helper can then discover these branches using a
hash lookup.
This helper is currently missing some key functionality. Namely: it
doesn't look for active rebases or bisects which mean that the branch is
"checked out" even though HEAD doesn't point to that ref. This
functionality will be added in a coming change.
We could use branch_checked_out() in validate_new_branchname(), but this
missing functionality would be a regression. However, we have no tests
that cover this case!
Add a new test script that will be expanded with these cross-worktree
ref updates. The current tests would still pass if we refactored
validate_new_branchname() to use this version of branch_checked_out().
The next change will fix that functionality and add the proper test
coverage.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
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>
To improve the submodules UX, we would like to teach Git to handle
branches in submodules. Start this process by teaching "git branch" the
--recurse-submodules option so that "git branch --recurse-submodules
topic" will create the `topic` branch in the superproject and its
submodules.
Although this commit does not introduce breaking changes, it does not
work well with existing --recurse-submodules commands because "git
branch --recurse-submodules" writes to the submodule ref store, but most
commands only consider the superproject gitlink and ignore the submodule
ref store. For example, "git checkout --recurse-submodules" will check
out the commits in the superproject gitlinks (and put the submodules in
detached HEAD) instead of checking out the submodule branches.
Because of this, this commit introduces a new configuration value,
`submodule.propagateBranches`. The plan is for Git commands to
prioritize submodule ref store information over superproject gitlinks if
this value is true. Because "git branch --recurse-submodules" writes to
submodule ref stores, for the sake of clarity, it will not function
unless this configuration value is set.
This commit also includes changes that support working with submodules
from a superproject commit because "branch --recurse-submodules" (and
future commands) need to read .gitmodules and gitlinks from the
superproject commit, but submodules are typically read from the
filesystem's .gitmodules and the index's gitlinks. These changes are:
* add a submodules_of_tree() helper that gives the relevant
information of an in-tree submodule (e.g. path and oid) and
initializes the repository
* add is_tree_submodule_active() by adding a treeish_name parameter to
is_submodule_active()
* add the "submoduleNotUpdated" advice to advise users to update the
submodules in their trees
Incidentally, fix an incorrect usage string that combined the 'list'
usage of git branch (-l) with the 'create' usage; this string has been
incorrect since its inception, a8dfd5eac4 (Make builtin-branch.c use
parse_options., 2007-10-07).
Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add a dry_run parameter to create_branch() such that dry_run = 1 will
validate a new branch without trying to create it. This will be used in
`git branch --recurse-submodules` to ensure that the new branch can be
created in all submodules.
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With the previous commit, there are no more invocations of
create_branch() that do not create a branch because:
* BRANCH_TRACK_OVERRIDE is no longer passed
* clobber_head_ok = true and force = false is never passed
Assert these situations, delete dead code and ensure that we're handling
clobber_head_ok and force correctly by introducing tests for `git branch
--force`. As a result, create_branch() now always creates a branch.
Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This commit is preparation for a future commit that will simplify
create_branch() so that it always creates a branch. This will allow
create_branch() to accept a dry_run parameter (which is needed for "git
branch --recurse-submodules").
create_branch() used to always create a branch, but 4fc5006676 (Add
branch --set-upstream, 2010-01-18) changed it to also be able to set
tracking information without creating a branch.
Refactor the code that sets tracking information into its own functions
dwim_branch_start() and dwim_and_setup_tracking(). Also change an
invocation of create_branch() in cmd_branch() in builtin/branch.c to use
dwim_and_setup_tracking(), since that invocation is only for setting
tracking information (in "git branch --set-upstream-to").
As of this commit, create_branch() is no longer invoked in a way that
does not create branches.
Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
It can be helpful when creating a new branch to use the existing
tracking configuration from the branch point. However, there is
currently not a method to automatically do so.
Teach git-{branch,checkout,switch} an "inherit" argument to the
"--track" option. When this is set, creating a new branch will cause the
tracking configuration to default to the configuration of the branch
point, if set.
For example, if branch "main" tracks "origin/main", and we run
`git checkout --track=inherit -b feature main`, then branch "feature"
will track "origin/main". Thus, `git status` will show us how far
ahead/behind we are from origin, and `git pull` will pull from origin.
This is particularly useful when creating branches across many
submodules, such as with `git submodule foreach ...` (or if running with
a patch such as [1], which we use at $job), as it avoids having to
manually set tracking info for each submodule.
Since we've added an argument to "--track", also add "--track=direct" as
another way to explicitly get the original "--track" behavior ("--track"
without an argument still works as well).
Finally, teach branch.autoSetupMerge a new "inherit" option. When this
is set, "--track=inherit" becomes the default behavior.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20180927221603.148025-1-sbeller@google.com/
Signed-off-by: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Two new commands "git switch" and "git restore" are introduced to
split "checking out a branch to work on advancing its history" and
"checking out paths out of the index and/or a tree-ish to work on
advancing the current history" out of the single "git checkout"
command.
* nd/switch-and-restore: (46 commits)
completion: disable dwim on "git switch -d"
switch: allow to switch in the middle of bisect
t2027: use test_must_be_empty
Declare both git-switch and git-restore experimental
help: move git-diff and git-reset to different groups
doc: promote "git restore"
user-manual.txt: prefer 'merge --abort' over 'reset --hard'
completion: support restore
t: add tests for restore
restore: support --patch
restore: replace --force with --ignore-unmerged
restore: default to --source=HEAD when only --staged is specified
restore: reject invalid combinations with --staged
restore: add --worktree and --staged
checkout: factor out worktree checkout code
restore: disable overlay mode by default
restore: make pathspec mandatory
restore: take tree-ish from --source option instead
checkout: split part of it to new command 'restore'
doc: promote "git switch"
...
"git merge" learned "--quit" option that cleans up the in-progress
merge while leaving the working tree and the index still in a mess.
* nd/merge-quit:
merge: add --quit
merge: remove drop_save() in favor of remove_merge_branch_state()
Both remove_branch_state() and drop_save() delete almost the same set of
files about the current merge state. The only difference is MERGE_RR but
it should also be cleaned up after a successful merge, which is what
drop_save() is for.
Make a new function that deletes all merge-related state files and use
it instead of drop_save(). This function will also be used in the next
patch that introduces --quit.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In previous patches, extern was mechanically removed from function
declarations without care to formatting, causing parameter lists to be
misaligned. Manually format changed sections such that the parameter
lists should be realigned.
Viewing this patch with 'git diff -w' should produce no output.
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There has been a push to remove extern from function declarations.
Remove some instances of "extern" for function declarations which are
caught by Coccinelle. Note that Coccinelle has some difficulty with
processing functions with `__attribute__` or varargs so some `extern`
declarations are left behind to be dealt with in a future patch.
This was the Coccinelle patch used:
@@
type T;
identifier f;
@@
- extern
T f(...);
and it was run with:
$ git ls-files \*.{c,h} |
grep -v ^compat/ |
xargs spatch --sp-file contrib/coccinelle/noextern.cocci --in-place
Files under `compat/` are intentionally excluded as some are directly
copied from external sources and we should avoid churning them as much
as possible.
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
After a successful switch, if a merge, cherry-pick or revert is ongoing,
it is canceled. This behavior has been with us from the very early
beginning, soon after git-merge was created but never actually
documented [1]. It may be a good idea to be transparent and tell the
user if some operation is canceled.
I consider this a better way of telling the user than just adding a
sentence or two in git-checkout.txt, which will be mostly ignored
anyway.
PS. Originally I wanted to print more details like
warning: cancelling an in-progress merge from <SHA-1>
which may allow some level of undo if the user wants to. But that seems
a lot more work. Perhaps it can be improved later if people still want
that.
[1] ... and I will try not to argue whether it is a sensible behavior.
There is some more discussion here if people are interested:
CACsJy8Axa5WsLSjiscjnxVK6jQHkfs-gH959=YtUvQkWriAk5w@mail.gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
'branch_track' feels more closely related to branching, and it is
needed later in branch.h; rather than #include'ing cache.h in branch.h
for this small enum, just move the enum and the external declaration
for git_branch_track to branch.h.
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
I looped over the toplevel header files, creating a temporary two-line C
program for each consisting of
#include "git-compat-util.h"
#include $HEADER
This patch is the result of manually fixing errors in compiling those
tiny programs.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Code clean-up.
* ks/branch-cleanup:
builtin/branch: strip refs/heads/ using skip_prefix
branch: update warning message shown when copying a misnamed branch
branch: group related arguments of create_branch()
branch: improve documentation and naming of create_branch() parameters
39bd6f726 (Allow checkout -B <current-branch> to update the current
branch, 2011-11-26) added 'clobber_head' (now, 'clobber_head_ok')
"before" 'track' as 'track' was closely related 'clobber_head' for
the purpose the commit wanted to achieve. Looking from the perspective
of how the arguments are used it turns out that 'clobber_head' is
more related to 'force' than it is to 'track'.
So, re-order the arguments to keep the related arguments close
to each other.
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The documentation for 'create_branch()' was incomplete as it didn't say
what certain parameters were used for. Further a parameter name wasn't
very communicative.
So, add missing documentation for the sake of completeness and easy
reference. Also, rename the concerned parameter to make its name more
communicative.
Signed-off-by: Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Checking if a proposed name is appropriate for a branch is strictly
a subset of checking if we want to allow creating or updating a
branch with such a name. The mysterious sounding 'attr_only'
parameter to validate_new_branchname() is used to switch the
function between these two roles.
Instead, split the function into two, and adjust the callers. A new
helper validate_branchname() only checks the name and reports if the
branch already exists.
This loses one NEEDSWORK from the branch API.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Renaming the current branch adds an event to the current branch's log
and to HEAD's log. However, the logged entries differ. The entry in
the branch's log represents the entire renaming operation (the old and
new hash are identical), whereas the entry in HEAD's log represents
the deletion only (the new sha1 is null).
Extend replace_each_worktree_head_symref(), whose only caller is
branch_rename(), to take a reflog message argument. This allows the
creation of the new ref to be recorded in HEAD's log. As a result,
the renaming event is represented by two entries (a deletion and a
creation entry) in HEAD's log.
It's a bit unfortunate that the branch's log and HEAD's log now
represent the renaming event in different ways. Given that the
renaming operation is not atomic, the two-entry form is a more
accurate representation of the operation and is more useful for
debugging purposes if a failure occurs between the deletion and
creation events. It would make sense to move the branch's log to the
two-entry form, but this would involve changes to how the rename is
carried out and to how the update flags and reflogs are processed for
deletions, so it may not be worth the effort.
Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function used to have the caller pass in the current
value of HEAD, in order to make sure we didn't clobber HEAD.
In 55c4a6730, that logic moved to validate_new_branchname(),
which just resolves HEAD itself. The parameter to
create_branch is now unused.
Since we have to update and re-wrap the docstring describing
the parameters anyway, let's take this opportunity to break
it out into a list, which makes it easier to find the
parameters.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function find_shared_symref() is used in a couple places:
1) in builtin/branch.c: it's used to detect if a branch is checked out
elsewhere and refuse to delete the branch.
2) in builtin/notes.c: it's used to detect if a note is being merged in
another worktree
3) in branch.c, the function die_if_checked_out() is actually used by
"git checkout" and "git worktree add" to see if a branch is already
checked out elsewhere and refuse the operation.
In cases 1 and 3, if a rebase is ongoing, "HEAD" will be in detached
mode, find_shared_symref() fails to detect it and declares "no branch is
checked out here", which is not really what we want.
This patch tightens the test. If the given symref is "HEAD", we try to
detect if rebase is ongoing. If so return the branch being rebased. This
makes checkout and branch delete operations safer because you can't
checkout a branch being rebased in another place, or delete it.
Special case for checkout. If the current branch is being rebased,
git-rebase.sh may use "git checkout" to abort and return back to the
original branch. The updated test in find_shared_symref() will prevent
that and "git rebase --abort" will fail as a result.
find_shared_symref() and die_if_checked_out() have to learn a new
option ignore_current_worktree to loosen the test a bit.
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When renaming a branch, currently only the HEAD of current working tree
is updated, but it must update HEADs of all working trees which point at
the old branch.
This is the current behavior, /path/to/wt's HEAD is not updated:
% git worktree list
/path/to 2c3c5f2 [master]
/path/to/wt 2c3c5f2 [oldname]
% git branch -m master master2
% git worktree list
/path/to 2c3c5f2 [master2]
/path/to/wt 2c3c5f2 [oldname]
% git branch -m oldname newname
% git worktree list
/path/to 2c3c5f2 [master2]
/path/to/wt 0000000 [oldname]
This patch fixes this issue by updating all relevant worktree HEADs
when renaming a branch.
Signed-off-by: Kazuki Yamaguchi <k@rhe.jp>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When setting up a new tracking branch fails due to issues with
the configuration file we do not report any errors to the user
and pretend setting the tracking branch succeeded.
Setting up the tracking branch is handled by the
`install_branch_config` function. We do not want to simply die
there as the function is not only invoked when explicitly setting
upstream information with `git branch --set-upstream-to=`, but
also by `git push --set-upstream` and `git clone`. While it is
reasonable to die in the explict first case, we would lose
information in the latter two cases, so we only print the error
message but continue the program as usual.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
worktree.c contains functions to work with and get information from
worktrees. This introduction moves functions related to worktrees
from branch.c into worktree.c
Signed-off-by: Michael Rappazzo <rappazzo@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add a new function, find_shared_symref, which contains the heart of
die_if_checked_out, but works for any symref, not just HEAD. Refactor
die_if_checked_out to use the same infrastructure as
find_shared_symref.
Soon, we will use find_shared_symref to protect notes merges in
worktrees.
Signed-off-by: David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>
Reviewed-by: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
git-worktree currently conflates new branch creation, setting of HEAD in
the new wortkree, and worktree population into a single sub-invocation
of git-checkout. However, these operations will eventually be separated,
and git-worktree itself will need to be able to detect if the branch is
already checked out elsewhere, rather than relying upon git-branch to
make this determination, so publish die_if_checked_out().
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Like the "switched to..." message (which is already
suppressed by "-q"), this message is purely informational.
Let's silence it if the user asked us to be quiet.
This patch is slightly more than a one-liner, because we
have to teach create_branch to propagate the flag all the
way down to install_branch_config.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When on master, "git checkout -B master <commit>" is a more natural way to
say "git reset --keep <commit>", which was originally invented for the
exact purpose of moving to the named commit while keeping the local changes
around.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This will be used by various callers that make use of the branch
description throughout the system, so that if we need to update
the implementation the callers do not have to be modified.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "git branch" command, while not in listing mode, calls create_branch()
even when the target branch already exists, and it does so even when it is
not interested in updating the value of the branch (i.e. the name of the
commit object that sits at the tip of the existing branch). This happens
when the command is run with "--set-upstream" option.
The earlier safety-measure to prevent "git branch -f $branch $commit" from
updating the currently checked out branch did not take it into account,
and we no longer can update the tracking information of the current branch.
Minimally fix this regression by telling the validation code if it is
called to really update the value of a potentially existing branch, or if
the caller merely is interested in updating auxiliary aspects of a branch.
Reported-and-Tested-by: Jay Soffian
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git branch -M <foo> <current-branch>" allows updating the current branch
which HEAD points, without the necessary house-keeping that git reset
normally does to make this operation sensible. It also leaves the reflog
in a confusing state (you would be warned when trying to read it).
"git checkout -B <current branch> <foo>" is also partly vulnerable to this
bug; due to inconsistent pre-flight checks it would perform half of its
task and then abort just before rewriting the branch. Again this
manifested itself as the index file getting out-of-sync with HEAD.
"git branch -f" already guarded against this problem, and aborts with
a fatal error.
Update "git branch -M", "git checkout -B" and "git branch -f" to share the
same check before allowing a branch to be created. These prevent you from
updating the current branch.
We considered suggesting the use of "git reset" in the failure message
but concluded that it was not possible to discern what the user was
actually trying to do.
Signed-off-by: Conrad Irwin <conrad.irwin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
(Just like we did for documentation already)
In the process, we change "non-remote branch" to "branch outside the
refs/remotes/ hierarchy" to avoid the ugly "non-remote-tracking branch".
The new formulation actually corresponds to how the code detects this
case (i.e. prefixcmp(refname, "refs/remotes")).
Also, we use 'remote-tracking branch' in generated merge messages (by
merge an fmt-merge-msg).
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When git-clone creates an initial branch it was not checking the
branch.autosetuprebase configuration option (which may exist in
~/.gitconfig). Refactor the code used by "git branch" to create
a new branch, and use it instead of the insufficiently duplicated code
in builtin-clone.
Changes are partly, and the test is mostly, based on the previous work by
Pat Notz.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git branch" and "git checkout -b" now honor --track option even when
the upstream branch is local. Previously --track was silently ignored
when forking from a local branch. Also the command did not error out
when --track was explicitly asked for but the forked point specified
was not an existing branch (i.e. when there is no way to set up the
tracking configuration), but now it correctly does.
The configuration setting branch.autosetupmerge can now be set to
"always", which is equivalent to using --track from the command line.
Setting branch.autosetupmerge to "true" will retain the former behavior
of only setting up branch.*.merge for remote upstream branches.
Includes test cases for the new functionality.
Signed-off-by: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
You can also create branches, in exactly the same way, with checkout -b.
This introduces branch.{c,h} library files for doing porcelain-level
operations on branches (such as creating them with their appropriate
default configuration).
Signed-off-by: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
