git-commit-vandalism/builtin/push.c

547 lines
16 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*
* "git push"
*/
#include "cache.h"
#include "refs.h"
#include "run-command.h"
#include "builtin.h"
#include "remote.h"
#include "transport.h"
#include "parse-options.h"
#include "submodule.h"
static const char * const push_usage[] = {
N_("git push [<options>] [<repository> [<refspec>...]]"),
NULL,
};
static int thin = 1;
static int deleterefs;
static const char *receivepack;
static int verbosity;
static int progress = -1;
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>
2013-07-09 00:34:36 +02:00
static struct push_cas_option cas;
static const char **refspec;
static int refspec_nr;
static int refspec_alloc;
static void add_refspec(const char *ref)
{
refspec_nr++;
ALLOC_GROW(refspec, refspec_nr, refspec_alloc);
refspec[refspec_nr-1] = 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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
static const char *map_refspec(const char *ref,
struct remote *remote, struct ref *local_refs)
{
push: use remote.$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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
struct ref *matched = NULL;
/* Does "ref" uniquely name our ref? */
if (count_refspec_match(ref, local_refs, &matched) != 1)
return ref;
if (remote->push) {
struct refspec query;
memset(&query, 0, sizeof(struct refspec));
query.src = matched->name;
if (!query_refspecs(remote->push, remote->push_refspec_nr, &query) &&
query.dst) {
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%s%s:%s",
query.force ? "+" : "",
query.src, query.dst);
return strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL);
}
}
if (push_default == PUSH_DEFAULT_UPSTREAM &&
starts_with(matched->name, "refs/heads/")) {
struct branch *branch = branch_get(matched->name + 11);
if (branch->merge_nr == 1 && branch->merge[0]->src) {
struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT;
strbuf_addf(&buf, "%s:%s",
ref, branch->merge[0]->src);
return strbuf_detach(&buf, NULL);
}
}
push: use remote.$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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
return ref;
}
static void set_refspecs(const char **refs, int nr, const char *repo)
{
struct remote *remote = NULL;
struct ref *local_refs = NULL;
int i;
push: use remote.$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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
const char *ref = refs[i];
if (!strcmp("tag", ref)) {
struct strbuf tagref = STRBUF_INIT;
if (nr <= ++i)
die(_("tag shorthand without <tag>"));
ref = refs[i];
if (deleterefs)
strbuf_addf(&tagref, ":refs/tags/%s", ref);
else
strbuf_addf(&tagref, "refs/tags/%s", ref);
ref = strbuf_detach(&tagref, NULL);
} else if (deleterefs) {
struct strbuf delref = STRBUF_INIT;
if (strchr(ref, ':'))
die(_("--delete only accepts plain target ref names"));
strbuf_addf(&delref, ":%s", ref);
ref = strbuf_detach(&delref, NULL);
push: use remote.$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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
} else if (!strchr(ref, ':')) {
if (!remote) {
/* lazily grab remote and local_refs */
remote = remote_get(repo);
local_refs = get_local_heads();
}
push: use remote.$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.$name.push refspec. This will bring a bit more symmetry between "fetch" and "push". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
ref = map_refspec(ref, remote, local_refs);
}
add_refspec(ref);
}
}
push: error out when the "upstream" semantics does not make sense The user can say "git push" without specifying any refspec. When using the "upstream" semantics via the push.default configuration, the user wants to update the "upstream" branch of the current branch, which is the branch at a remote repository the current branch is set to integrate with, with this command. However, there are cases that such a "git push" that uses the "upstream" semantics does not make sense: - The current branch does not have branch.$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>
2012-03-31 01:07:12 +02:00
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;
}
static NORETURN int die_push_simple(struct branch *branch, struct remote *remote) {
/*
* 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.
*/
const char *advice_maybe = "";
const char *short_upstream = branch->merge[0]->src;
skip_prefix(short_upstream, "refs/heads/", &short_upstream);
/*
* Don't show advice for people who explicitly set
* push.default.
*/
if (push_default == PUSH_DEFAULT_UNSPECIFIED)
advice_maybe = _("\n"
"To choose either option permanently, "
"see push.default in 'git help config'.");
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"
" git push %s %s\n"
"%s"),
remote->name, short_upstream,
remote->name, branch->name, advice_maybe);
}
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");
static void setup_push_upstream(struct remote *remote, struct branch *branch,
int triangular, int simple)
{
struct strbuf refspec = STRBUF_INIT;
if (!branch)
die(_(message_detached_head_die), remote->name);
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 $there, which was totally bogus. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-31 01:07:12 +02:00
if (!branch->merge_nr || !branch->merge || !branch->remote_name)
die(_("The current branch %s has no upstream branch.\n"
"To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use\n"
"\n"
" git push --set-upstream %s %s\n"),
branch->name,
remote->name,
branch->name);
if (branch->merge_nr != 1)
die(_("The current branch %s has multiple upstream branches, "
"refusing to push."), branch->name);
if (triangular)
push: error out when the "upstream" semantics does not make sense The user can say "git push" without specifying any refspec. When using the "upstream" semantics via the push.default configuration, the user wants to update the "upstream" branch of the current branch, which is the branch at a remote repository the current branch is set to integrate with, with this command. However, there are cases that such a "git push" that uses the "upstream" semantics does not make sense: - The current branch does not have branch.$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 $there, which was totally bogus. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2012-03-31 01:07:12 +02:00
die(_("You are pushing to remote '%s', which is not the upstream of\n"
"your current branch '%s', without telling me what to push\n"
"to update which remote branch."),
remote->name, branch->name);
if (simple) {
/* Additional safety */
if (strcmp(branch->refname, branch->merge[0]->src))
die_push_simple(branch, remote);
}
push: error out when the "upstream" semantics does not make sense The user can say "git push" without specifying any refspec. When using the "upstream" semantics via the push.default configuration, the user wants to update the "upstream" branch of the current branch, which is the branch at a remote repository the current branch is set to integrate with, with this command. However, there are cases that such a "git push" that uses the "upstream" semantics does not make sense: - The current branch does not have branch.$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>
2012-03-31 01:07:12 +02:00
strbuf_addf(&refspec, "%s:%s", branch->name, branch->merge[0]->src);
add_refspec(refspec.buf);
}
static void setup_push_current(struct remote *remote, struct branch *branch)
{
if (!branch)
die(_(message_detached_head_die), remote->name);
add_refspec(branch->name);
}
static char warn_unspecified_push_default_msg[] =
N_("push.default is unset; its implicit value has changed in\n"
"Git 2.0 from 'matching' to 'simple'. To squelch this message\n"
"and maintain the traditional behavior, use:\n"
"\n"
" git config --global push.default matching\n"
"\n"
"To squelch this message and adopt the new behavior now, use:\n"
"\n"
" git config --global push.default simple\n"
"\n"
"When push.default is set to 'matching', git will push local branches\n"
"to the remote branches that already exist with the same name.\n"
"\n"
"Since Git 2.0, Git defaults to the more conservative 'simple'\n"
"behavior, which only pushes the current branch to the corresponding\n"
"remote branch that 'git pull' uses to update the current branch.\n"
"\n"
"See 'git help config' and search for 'push.default' for further information.\n"
"(the 'simple' mode was introduced in Git 1.7.11. Use the similar mode\n"
"'current' instead of 'simple' if you sometimes use older versions of Git)");
static void warn_unspecified_push_default_configuration(void)
{
static int warn_once;
if (warn_once++)
return;
warning("%s\n", _(warn_unspecified_push_default_msg));
}
static int is_workflow_triangular(struct remote *remote)
{
struct remote *fetch_remote = remote_get(NULL);
return (fetch_remote && fetch_remote != remote);
}
static void setup_default_push_refspecs(struct remote *remote)
{
struct branch *branch = branch_get(NULL);
int triangular = is_workflow_triangular(remote);
switch (push_default) {
default:
case PUSH_DEFAULT_MATCHING:
add_refspec(":");
break;
case PUSH_DEFAULT_UNSPECIFIED:
warn_unspecified_push_default_configuration();
/* fallthru */
case PUSH_DEFAULT_SIMPLE:
if (triangular)
setup_push_current(remote, branch);
else
setup_push_upstream(remote, branch, triangular, 1);
break;
case PUSH_DEFAULT_UPSTREAM:
setup_push_upstream(remote, branch, triangular, 0);
break;
case PUSH_DEFAULT_CURRENT:
setup_push_current(remote, branch);
break;
case PUSH_DEFAULT_NOTHING:
die(_("You didn't specify any refspecs to push, and "
"push.default is \"nothing\"."));
break;
}
}
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 05:31:33 +01:00
static const char message_advice_pull_before_push[] =
N_("Updates were rejected because the tip of your current branch is behind\n"
"its remote counterpart. Integrate the remote changes (e.g.\n"
"'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 05:31:33 +01:00
"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"
"counterpart. Check out this branch and integrate the remote changes\n"
"(e.g. '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 05:31:33 +01:00
"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 22:55:30 +01:00
static const char message_advice_ref_fetch_first[] =
N_("Updates were rejected because the remote contains work that you do\n"
"not have locally. This is usually caused by another repository pushing\n"
"to the same ref. You may want to first integrate the remote changes\n"
"(e.g., '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 22:55:30 +01:00
"See the 'Note about fast-forwards' in 'git push --help' for details.");
static const char message_advice_ref_already_exists[] =
N_("Updates were rejected because the tag already exists in the remote.");
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 22:55:30 +01:00
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");
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 05:31:33 +01:00
static void advise_pull_before_push(void)
{
if (!advice_push_non_ff_current || !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 05:31:33 +01:00
return;
advise(_(message_advice_pull_before_push));
}
static void advise_checkout_pull_push(void)
{
if (!advice_push_non_ff_matching || !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 05:31:33 +01:00
return;
advise(_(message_advice_checkout_pull_push));
}
static void advise_ref_already_exists(void)
{
if (!advice_push_already_exists || !advice_push_update_rejected)
return;
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 22:55:30 +01:00
static void advise_ref_fetch_first(void)
{
if (!advice_push_fetch_first || !advice_push_update_rejected)
return;
advise(_(message_advice_ref_fetch_first));
}
static void advise_ref_needs_force(void)
{
if (!advice_push_needs_force || !advice_push_update_rejected)
return;
advise(_(message_advice_ref_needs_force));
}
static int push_with_options(struct transport *transport, int flags)
{
int err;
unsigned int reject_reasons;
transport_set_verbosity(transport, verbosity, progress);
if (receivepack)
transport_set_option(transport,
TRANS_OPT_RECEIVEPACK, receivepack);
transport_set_option(transport, TRANS_OPT_THIN, thin ? "yes" : NULL);
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;
}
if (verbosity > 0)
fprintf(stderr, _("Pushing to %s\n"), transport->url);
err = transport_push(transport, refspec_nr, refspec, flags,
&reject_reasons);
if (err != 0)
error(_("failed to push some refs to '%s'"), transport->url);
err |= transport_disconnect(transport);
if (!err)
return 0;
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 05:31:33 +01:00
advise_pull_before_push();
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_NON_FF_OTHER) {
advise_checkout_pull_push();
} 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 22:55:30 +01:00
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_FETCH_FIRST) {
advise_ref_fetch_first();
} else if (reject_reasons & REJECT_NEEDS_FORCE) {
advise_ref_needs_force();
}
return 1;
}
static int do_push(const char *repo, int flags)
{
int i, errs;
struct remote *remote = pushremote_get(repo);
const char **url;
int url_nr;
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) && refspec) {
if (!strcmp(*refspec, "refs/tags/*"))
return error(_("--all and --tags are incompatible"));
return error(_("--all can't be combined with refspecs"));
}
if ((flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR) && refspec) {
if (!strcmp(*refspec, "refs/tags/*"))
return error(_("--mirror and --tags are incompatible"));
return error(_("--mirror can't be combined with refspecs"));
}
if ((flags & (TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL|TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR)) ==
(TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL|TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR)) {
return error(_("--all and --mirror are incompatible"));
}
if (!refspec && !(flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL)) {
if (remote->push_refspec_nr) {
refspec = remote->push_refspec;
refspec_nr = remote->push_refspec_nr;
} else if (!(flags & TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))
setup_default_push_refspecs(remote);
}
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>
2012-03-31 01:07:12 +02:00
url_nr = push_url_of_remote(remote, &url);
if (url_nr) {
for (i = 0; i < url_nr; i++) {
struct transport *transport =
transport_get(remote, url[i]);
if (push_with_options(transport, flags))
errs++;
}
} else {
struct transport *transport =
transport_get(remote, NULL);
if (push_with_options(transport, flags))
errs++;
}
return !!errs;
}
static int option_parse_recurse_submodules(const struct option *opt,
const char *arg, int unset)
{
int *flags = opt->value;
if (*flags & (TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_CHECK |
TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND))
die("%s can only be used once.", opt->long_name);
if (arg) {
if (!strcmp(arg, "check"))
*flags |= TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_CHECK;
else if (!strcmp(arg, "on-demand"))
*flags |= TRANSPORT_RECURSE_SUBMODULES_ON_DEMAND;
else
die("bad %s argument: %s", opt->long_name, arg);
} else
die("option %s needs an argument (check|on-demand)",
opt->long_name);
return 0;
}
static int git_push_config(const char *k, const char *v, void *cb)
{
struct wt_status *s = cb;
int status;
status = git_gpg_config(k, v, NULL);
if (status)
return status;
return git_default_config(k, v, s);
}
int cmd_push(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
{
int flags = 0;
int tags = 0;
int rc;
const char *repo = NULL; /* default repository */
struct option options[] = {
OPT__VERBOSITY(&verbosity),
OPT_STRING( 0 , "repo", &repo, N_("repository"), N_("repository")),
OPT_BIT( 0 , "all", &flags, N_("push all refs"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL),
OPT_BIT( 0 , "mirror", &flags, N_("mirror all refs"),
(TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR|TRANSPORT_PUSH_FORCE)),
OPT_BOOL( 0, "delete", &deleterefs, N_("delete refs")),
OPT_BOOL( 0 , "tags", &tags, N_("push tags (can't be used with --all or --mirror)")),
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),
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>
2013-07-09 00:34:36 +02:00
{ OPTION_CALLBACK,
0, CAS_OPT_NAME, &cas, N_("refname>:<expect"),
N_("require old value of ref to be at this value"),
PARSE_OPT_OPTARG, parseopt_push_cas_option },
{ OPTION_CALLBACK, 0, "recurse-submodules", &flags, "check|on-demand",
N_("control recursive pushing of submodules"),
PARSE_OPT_OPTARG, option_parse_recurse_submodules },
OPT_BOOL( 0 , "thin", &thin, N_("use thin pack")),
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"),
TRANSPORT_PUSH_SET_UPSTREAM),
OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &progress, N_("force progress reporting")),
OPT_BIT(0, "prune", &flags, N_("prune locally removed refs"),
TRANSPORT_PUSH_PRUNE),
OPT_BIT(0, "no-verify", &flags, N_("bypass pre-push hook"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_NO_HOOK),
OPT_BIT(0, "follow-tags", &flags, N_("push missing but relevant tags"),
TRANSPORT_PUSH_FOLLOW_TAGS),
push: the beginning of "git push --signed" While signed tags and commits assert that the objects thusly signed came from you, who signed these objects, there is not a good way to assert that you wanted to have a particular object at the tip of a particular branch. My signing v2.0.1 tag only means I want to call the version v2.0.1, and it does not mean I want to push it out to my 'master' branch---it is likely that I only want it in 'maint', so the signature on the object alone is insufficient. The only assurance to you that 'maint' points at what I wanted to place there comes from your trust on the hosting site and my authentication with it, which cannot easily audited later. Introduce a mechanism that allows you to sign a "push certificate" (for the lack of better name) every time you push, asserting that what object you are pushing to update which ref that used to point at what other object. Think of it as a cryptographic protection for ref updates, similar to signed tags/commits but working on an orthogonal axis. The basic flow based on this mechanism goes like this: 1. You push out your work with "git push --signed". 2. The sending side learns where the remote refs are as usual, together with what protocol extension the receiving end supports. If the receiving end does not advertise the protocol extension "push-cert", an attempt to "git push --signed" fails. Otherwise, a text file, that looks like the following, is prepared in core: certificate version 0.1 pusher Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 1315427886 -0700 7339ca65... 21580ecb... refs/heads/master 3793ac56... 12850bec... refs/heads/next The file begins with a few header lines, which may grow as we gain more experience. The 'pusher' header records the name of the signer (the value of user.signingkey configuration variable, falling back to GIT_COMMITTER_{NAME|EMAIL}) and the time of the certificate generation. After the header, a blank line follows, followed by a copy of the protocol message lines. Each line shows the old and the new object name at the tip of the ref this push tries to update, in the way identical to how the underlying "git push" protocol exchange tells the ref updates to the receiving end (by recording the "old" object name, the push certificate also protects against replaying). It is expected that new command packet types other than the old-new-refname kind will be included in push certificate in the same way as would appear in the plain vanilla command packets in unsigned pushes. The user then is asked to sign this push certificate using GPG, formatted in a way similar to how signed tag objects are signed, and the result is sent to the other side (i.e. receive-pack). In the protocol exchange, this step comes immediately before the sender tells what the result of the push should be, which in turn comes before it sends the pack data. 3. When the receiving end sees a push certificate, the certificate is written out as a blob. The pre-receive hook can learn about the certificate by checking GIT_PUSH_CERT environment variable, which, if present, tells the object name of this blob, and make the decision to allow or reject this push. Additionally, the post-receive hook can also look at the certificate, which may be a good place to log all the received certificates for later audits. Because a push certificate carry the same information as the usual command packets in the protocol exchange, we can omit the latter when a push certificate is in use and reduce the protocol overhead. This however is not included in this patch to make it easier to review (in other words, the series at this step should never be released without the remainder of the series, as it implements an interim protocol that will be incompatible with the final one). As such, the documentation update for the protocol is left out of this step. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-09-12 20:17:07 +02:00
OPT_BIT(0, "signed", &flags, N_("GPG sign the push"), TRANSPORT_PUSH_CERT),
OPT_END()
};
packet_trace_identity("push");
git_config(git_push_config, NULL);
argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, push_usage, 0);
if (deleterefs && (tags || (flags & (TRANSPORT_PUSH_ALL | TRANSPORT_PUSH_MIRROR))))
die(_("--delete is incompatible with --all, --mirror and --tags"));
if (deleterefs && argc < 2)
die(_("--delete doesn't make sense without any refs"));
if (tags)
add_refspec("refs/tags/*");
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>
2013-12-04 00:41:15 +01:00
set_refspecs(argv + 1, argc - 1, repo);
}
rc = do_push(repo, flags);
if (rc == -1)
usage_with_options(push_usage, options);
else
return rc;
}