The receive-pack program now makes sure that the push certificate
records the same set of push options used for pushing.
* jt/push-options-doc:
receive-pack: verify push options in cert
docs: correct receive.advertisePushOptions default
A few http:// links that are redirected to https:// in the
documentation have been updated to https:// links.
* jk/update-links-in-docs:
doc: use https links to Wikipedia to avoid http redirects
Clarify documentation for include.path and includeIf.<condition>.path
configuration variables.
* jk/doc-config-include:
docs/config: consistify include.path examples
docs/config: avoid the term "expand" for includes
docs/config: give a relative includeIf example
docs/config: clarify include/includeIf relationship
Git sometimes gives an advice in a rhetorical question that does
not require an answer, which can confuse new users and non native
speakers. Attempt to rephrase them.
* ja/do-not-ask-needless-questions:
git-filter-branch: be more direct in an error message
read-tree -m: make error message for merging 0 trees less smart aleck
usability: don't ask questions if no reply is required
The Web interface to gmane news archive is long gone, even though
the articles are still accessible via NTTP. Replace the links with
ones to public-inbox.org. Because their message identification is
based on the actual message-id, it is likely that it will be easier
to migrate away from it if/when necessary.
* ab/doc-replace-gmane-links:
doc: replace more gmane links
doc: replace a couple of broken gmane links
Signed-off-by: Sven Strickroth <email@cs-ware.de>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
"git read-tree -m" requires a tree argument to name the tree to be
merged in. Git uses a cutesy error message to say so and why:
$ git read-tree -m
warning: read-tree: emptying the index with no arguments is
deprecated; use --empty
fatal: just how do you expect me to merge 0 trees?
$ git read-tree -m --empty
fatal: just how do you expect me to merge 0 trees?
When lucky, that could produce an ah-hah moment for the user, but it's
more likely to irritate and distract them.
Instead, tell the user plainly that the tree argument is
required. Also document this requirement in the git-read-tree(1)
manpage where there is room to explain it in a more straightforward way.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Noel Avila <jn.avila@free.fr>
Helped-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Most of the include examples use "foo.inc", but some use
"foo". Since the string of examples are meant to show
variations and how they differ, it's a good idea to change
only one thing at a time. The filename differences are not
relevant to what we're trying to show.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Using the word "expand" to refer to including the contents
of another config file isn't really accurate, since it's a
verbatim insertion. And it can cause confusion with the
expanding of the path itself via things like "~".
Let's clarify when we are referring to the contents versus
the filename, and use appropriate verbs in each case.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The changes in the previous commit hopefully clarify that
the evaluation of an include "path" variable is the same no
matter if it's in a conditional section or not. But since
this question came up on the list, let's add an example that
makes it obvious.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "includeIf" directives behave exactly like include ones,
except they only kick in when the conditional is true. That
was mentioned in the "conditional" section, but let's make
it more clear for the whole "includes" section, since people
don't necessarily read the documentation top to bottom.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In commit f6a4e61 ("push: accept push options", 2016-07-14), send-pack
was taught to include push options both within the signed cert (if the
push is a signed push) and outside the signed cert; however,
receive-pack ignores push options within the cert, only handling push
options outside the cert.
Teach receive-pack, in the case that push options are provided for a
signed push, to verify that the push options both within the cert and
outside the cert are consistent.
This sets in stone the requirement that send-pack redundantly send its
push options in 2 places, but I think that this is better than the
alternatives. Sending push options only within the cert is
backwards-incompatible with existing Git servers (which read push
options only from outside the cert), and sending push options only
outside the cert means that the push options are not signed for.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In commit c714e45 ("receive-pack: implement advertising and receiving
push options", 2016-07-14), receive-pack was taught to (among other
things) advertise that it understood push options, depending on
configuration. It was documented that it advertised such ability by
default; however, it actually does not. (In that commit, notice that
advertise_push_options defaults to 0, unlike advertise_atomic_push which
defaults to 1.)
Update the documentation to state that it does not advertise the ability
by default.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Replace a couple of broken links to gmane with links to other
archives. See commit 54471fdcc3 ("README: replace gmane link with
public-inbox", 2016-12-15) for prior art.
With this change there's still 4 references left in the code:
$ git grep -E '(article|thread)\.gmane.org' -- |grep -v RelNotes|wc -l
4
I couldn't find alternative links for those.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Listing the specific hooks might feel verbose but without it the
reader is left to wonder which hooks are triggered during the
push. Something which is not immediately obvious when only trying
to find out where the hook is executed.
Signed-off-by: Simon Ruderich <simon@ruderich.org>
Reviewed-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
-use US English spelling
-minor wording change for better readability
Helped-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: René Genz <liebundartig@freenet.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Allow to lock a worktree immediately after it's created. This helps
prevent a race between "git worktree add; git worktree lock" and
"git worktree prune".
* nd/worktree-add-lock:
worktree add: add --lock option
Many stale HTTP(s) links have been updated in our documentation.
* jk/update-links-in-docs:
docs/bisect-lk2009: update java code conventions link
docs/bisect-lk2009: update nist report link
docs/archimport: quote sourcecontrol.net reference
gitcore-tutorial: update broken link
doc: replace or.cz gitwiki link with git.wiki.kernel.org
doc: use https links to avoid http redirect
