To help pinpoint the source of a regression, it is useful to know some
info about the compiler which the user's Git client was built with. By
adding a generic get_compiler_info() in 'compat/' we can choose which
relevant information to share per compiler; to get started, let's
demonstrate the version of glibc if the user built with 'gcc'.
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Helped-by: Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The contents of uname() can give us some insight into what sort of
system the user is running on, and help us replicate their setup if need
be. The domainname field is not guaranteed to be available, so don't
collect it.
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Knowing which version of Git a user has and how it was built allows us
to more precisely pin down the circumstances when a certain issue
occurs, so teach bugreport how to tell us the same output as 'git
version --build-options'.
It's not ideal to directly call 'git version --build-options' because
that output goes to stdout. Instead, wrap the version string in a helper
within help.[ch] library, and call that helper from within the bugreport
library.
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Teach Git how to prompt the user for a good bug report: reproduction
steps, expected behavior, and actual behavior. Later, Git can learn how
to collect some diagnostic information from the repository.
If users can send us a well-written bug report which contains diagnostic
information we would otherwise need to ask the user for, we can reduce
the number of question-and-answer round trips between the reporter and
the Git contributor.
Users may also wish to send a report like this to their local "Git
expert" if they have put their repository into a state they are confused
by.
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In 'git log', the --decorate-refs-exclude option appends a pattern
to a string_list. This list is used to prevent showing some refs
in the decoration output, or even by --simplify-by-decoration.
Users may want to use their refs space to store utility refs that
should not appear in the decoration output. For example, Scalar [1]
runs a background fetch but places the "new" refs inside the
refs/scalar/hidden/<remote>/* refspace instead of refs/<remote>/*
to avoid updating remote refs when the user is not looking. However,
these "hidden" refs appear during regular 'git log' queries.
A similar idea to use "hidden" refs is under consideration for core
Git [2].
Add the 'log.excludeDecoration' config option so users can exclude
some refs from decorations by default instead of needing to use
--decorate-refs-exclude manually. The config value is multi-valued
much like the command-line option. The documentation is careful to
point out that the config value can be overridden by the
--decorate-refs option, even though --decorate-refs-exclude would
always "win" over --decorate-refs.
Since the 'log.excludeDecoration' takes lower precedence to
--decorate-refs, and --decorate-refs-exclude takes higher
precedence, the struct decoration_filter needed another field.
This led also to new logic in load_ref_decorations() and
ref_filter_match().
There are several tests in t4202-log.sh that test the
--decorate-refs-(include|exclude) options, so these are extended.
Since the expected output is already stored as a file, most tests
could simply replace a "--decorate-refs-exclude" option with an
in-line config setting. Other tests involve the precedence of
the config option compared to command-line options and needed more
modification.
[1] https://github.com/microsoft/scalar
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/77b1da5d3063a2404cd750adfe3bb8be9b6c497d.1585946894.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/
Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gister@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "mboxrd" pretty format was introduced in 9f23e04061 (pretty: support
"mboxrd" output format, 2016-06-05) but wasn't mentioned in the
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Emma Brooks <me@pluvano.com>
Acked-by: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When operating on a stream of commit OIDs on stdin, 'git commit-graph
write' checks that each OID refers to an object that is indeed a commit.
This is convenient to make sure that the given input is well-formed, but
can sometimes be undesirable.
For example, server operators may wish to feed the refnames that were
updated during a push to 'git commit-graph write --input=stdin-commits',
and silently discard refs that don't point at commits. This can be done
by combing the output of 'git for-each-ref' with '--format
%(*objecttype)', but this requires opening up a potentially large number
of objects. Instead, it is more convenient to feed the updated refs to
the commit-graph machinery, and let it throw out refs that don't point
to commits.
Introduce '--[no-]check-oids' to make such a behavior possible. With
'--check-oids' (the default behavior to retain backwards compatibility),
'git commit-graph write' will barf on a non-commit line in its input.
With 'no-check-oids', such lines will be silently ignored, making the
above possible by specifying this option.
No matter which is supplied, 'git commit-graph write' retains the
behavior from the previous commit of rejecting non-OID inputs like
"HEAD" and "refs/heads/foo" as before.
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When using split commit-graphs, it is sometimes useful to completely
replace the commit-graph chain with a new base.
For example, consider a scenario in which a repository builds a new
commit-graph incremental for each push. Occasionally (say, after some
fixed number of pushes), they may wish to rebuild the commit-graph chain
with all reachable commits.
They can do so with
$ git commit-graph write --reachable
but this removes the chain entirely and replaces it with a single
commit-graph in 'objects/info/commit-graph'. Unfortunately, this means
that the next push will have to move this commit-graph into the first
layer of a new chain, and then write its new commits on top.
Avoid such copying entirely by allowing the caller to specify that they
wish to replace the entirety of their commit-graph chain, while also
specifying that the new commit-graph should become the basis of a fresh,
length-one chain.
This addresses the above situation by making it possible for the caller
to instead write:
$ git commit-graph write --reachable --split=replace
which writes a new length-one chain to 'objects/info/commit-graphs',
making the commit-graph incremental generated by the subsequent push
relatively cheap by avoiding the aforementioned copy.
In order to do this, remove an assumption in 'write_commit_graph_file'
that chains are always at least two incrementals long.
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the previous commit, we laid the groundwork for supporting different
splitting strategies. In this commit, we introduce the first splitting
strategy: 'no-merge'.
Passing '--split=no-merge' is useful for callers which wish to write a
new incremental commit-graph, but do not want to spend effort condensing
the incremental chain [1]. Previously, this was possible by passing
'--size-multiple=0', but this no longer the case following 63020f175f
(commit-graph: prefer default size_mult when given zero, 2020-01-02).
When '--split=no-merge' is given, the commit-graph machinery will never
condense an existing chain, and it will always write a new incremental.
[1]: This might occur when, for example, a server administrator running
some program after each push may want to ensure that each job runs
proportional in time to the size of the push, and does not "jump" when
the commit-graph machinery decides to trigger a merge.
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With '--split', the commit-graph machinery writes new commits in another
incremental commit-graph which is part of the existing chain, and
optionally decides to condense the chain into a single commit-graph.
This is done to ensure that the asymptotic behavior of looking up a
commit in an incremental chain is not dominated by the number of
incrementals in that chain. It can be controlled by the '--max-commits'
and '--size-multiple' options.
In the next two commits, we will introduce additional splitting
strategies that can exert additional control over:
- when a split commit-graph is and isn't written, and
- when the existing commit-graph chain is discarded completely and
replaced with another graph
To prepare for this, make '--split' take an optional strategy (as in
'--split[=<strategy>]'), and add a new enum to describe which strategy
is being used. For now, no strategies are given, and the only enumerated
value is 'COMMIT_GRAPH_SPLIT_UNSPECIFIED', indicating the absence of a
strategy.
Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When rebasing against an upstream that has had many commits since the
original branch was created:
O -- O -- ... -- O -- O (upstream)
\
-- O (my-dev-branch)
it must read the contents of every novel upstream commit, in addition to
the tip of the upstream and the merge base, because "git rebase"
attempts to exclude commits that are duplicates of upstream ones. This
can be a significant performance hit, especially in a partial clone,
wherein a read of an object may end up being a fetch.
Add a flag to "git rebase" to allow suppression of this feature. This
flag only works when using the "merge" backend.
This flag changes the behavior of sequencer_make_script(), called from
do_interactive_rebase() <- run_rebase_interactive() <-
run_specific_rebase() <- cmd_rebase(). With this flag, limit_list()
(indirectly called from sequencer_make_script() through
prepare_revision_walk()) will no longer call cherry_pick_list(), and
thus PATCHSAME is no longer set. Refraining from setting PATCHSAME both
means that the intermediate commits in upstream are no longer read (as
shown by the test) and means that no PATCHSAME-caused skipping of
commits is done by sequencer_make_script(), either directly or through
make_script_with_merges().
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit d48e5e21da ("rebase (interactive-backend): make --keep-empty the
default", 2020-02-15) turned --keep-empty (for keeping commits which
start empty) into the default. The logic underpinning that commit was:
1) 'git commit' errors out on the creation of empty commits without an
override flag
2) Once someone determines that the override is worthwhile, it's
annoying and/or harmful to required them to take extra steps in
order to keep such commits around (and to repeat such steps with
every rebase).
While the logic on which the decision was made is sound, the result was
a bit of an overcorrection. Instead of jumping to having --keep-empty
being the default, it jumped to making --keep-empty the only available
behavior. There was a simple workaround, though, which was thought to
be good enough at the time. People could still drop commits which
started empty the same way the could drop any commits: by firing up an
interactive rebase and picking out the commits they didn't want from the
list. However, there are cases where external tools might create enough
empty commits that picking all of them out is painful. As such, having
a flag to automatically remove start-empty commits may be beneficial.
Provide users a way to drop commits which start empty using a flag that
existed for years: --no-keep-empty. Interpret --keep-empty as
countermanding any previous --no-keep-empty, but otherwise leaving
--keep-empty as the default.
This might lead to some slight weirdness since commands like
git rebase --empty=drop --keep-empty
git rebase --empty=keep --no-keep-empty
look really weird despite making perfect sense (the first will drop
commits which become empty, but keep commits that started empty; the
second will keep commits which become empty, but drop commits which
started empty). However, --no-keep-empty was named years ago and we are
predominantly keeping it for backward compatibility; also we suspect it
will only be used rarely since folks already have a simple way to drop
commits they don't want with an interactive rebase.
Reported-by: Bryan Turner <bturner@atlassian.com>
Reported-by: Sami Boukortt <sami@boukortt.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
While many users who intentionally create empty commits do not want them
thrown away by a rebase, there are third-party tools that generate empty
commits that a user might not want. In the past, users have used rebase
to get rid of such commits (a side-effect of the fact that the --apply
backend is not currently capable of keeping them). While such users
could fire up an interactive rebase and just remove the lines
corresponding to empty commits, that might be difficult if the
third-party tool generates many of them. Simplify this task for users
by marking such lines with a suffix of " # empty" in the todo list.
Suggested-by: Sami Boukortt <sami@boukortt.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The default file history simplification of "git log -- <path>" or
"git rev-list -- <path>" focuses on providing the smallest set of
commits that first contributed a change. The revision walk greatly
restricts the set of walked commits by visiting only the first
TREESAME parent of a merge commit, when one exists. This means
that portions of the commit-graph are not walked, which can be a
performance benefit, but can also "hide" commits that added changes
but were ignored by a merge resolution.
The --full-history option modifies this by walking all commits and
reporting a merge commit as "interesting" if it has _any_ parent
that is not TREESAME. This tends to be an over-representation of
important commits, especially in an environment where most merge
commits are created by pull request completion.
Suppose we have a commit A and we create a commit B on top that
changes our file. When we merge the pull request, we create a merge
commit M. If no one else changed the file in the first-parent
history between M and A, then M will not be TREESAME to its first
parent, but will be TREESAME to B. Thus, the simplified history
will be "B". However, M will appear in the --full-history mode.
However, suppose that a number of topics T1, T2, ..., Tn were
created based on commits C1, C2, ..., Cn between A and M as
follows:
A----C1----C2--- ... ---Cn----M------P1---P2--- ... ---Pn
\ \ \ \ / / / /
\ \__.. \ \/ ..__T1 / Tn
\ \__.. /\ ..__T2 /
\_____________________B \____________________/
If the commits T1, T2, ... Tn did not change the file, then all of
P1 through Pn will be TREESAME to their first parent, but not
TREESAME to their second. This means that all of those merge commits
appear in the --full-history view, with edges that immediately
collapse into the lower history without introducing interesting
single-parent commits.
The --simplify-merges option was introduced to remove these extra
merge commits. By noticing that the rewritten parents are reachable
from their first parents, those edges can be simplified away. Finally,
the commits now look like single-parent commits that are TREESAME to
their "only" parent. Thus, they are removed and this issue does not
cause issues anymore. However, this also ends up removing the commit
M from the history view! Even worse, the --simplify-merges option
requires walking the entire history before returning a single result.
Many Git users are using Git alongside a Git service that provides
code storage alongside a code review tool commonly called "Pull
Requests" or "Merge Requests" against a target branch. When these
requests are accepted and merged, they typically create a merge
commit whose first parent is the previous branch tip and the second
parent is the tip of the topic branch used for the request. This
presents a valuable order to the parents, but also makes that merge
commit slightly special. Users may want to see not only which
commits changed a file, but which pull requests merged those commits
into their branch. In the previous example, this would mean the
users want to see the merge commit "M" in addition to the single-
parent commit "C".
Users are even more likely to want these merge commits when they
use pull requests to merge into a feature branch before merging that
feature branch into their trunk.
In some sense, users are asking for the "first" merge commit to
bring in the change to their branch. As long as the parent order is
consistent, this can be handled with the following rule:
Include a merge commit if it is not TREESAME to its first
parent, but is TREESAME to a later parent.
These merges look like the merge commits that would result from
running "git pull <topic>" on a main branch. Thus, the option to
show these commits is called "--show-pulls". This has the added
benefit of showing the commits created by closing a pull request or
merge request on any of the Git hosting and code review platforms.
To test these options, extend the standard test example to include
a merge commit that is not TREESAME to its first parent. It is
surprising that that option was not already in the example, as it
is instructive.
In particular, this extension demonstrates a common issue with file
history simplification. When a user resolves a merge conflict using
"-Xours" or otherwise ignoring one side of the conflict, they create
a TREESAME edge that probably should not be TREESAME. This leads
users to become frustrated and complain that "my change disappeared!"
In my experience, showing them history with --full-history and
--simplify-merges quickly reveals the problematic merge. As mentioned,
this option is expensive to compute. The --show-pulls option
_might_ show the merge commit (usually titled "resolving conflicts")
more quickly. Of course, this depends on the user having the correct
parent order, which is backwards when using "git pull master" from a
topic branch.
There are some special considerations when combining the --show-pulls
option with --simplify-merges. This requires adding a new PULL_MERGE
object flag to store the information from the initial TREESAME
comparisons. This helps avoid dropping those commits in later filters.
This is covered by a test, including how the parents can be simplified.
Since "struct object" has already ruined its 32-bit alignment by using
33 bits across parsed, type, and flags member, let's not make it worse.
PULL_MERGE is used in revision.c with the same value (1u<<15) as
REACHABLE in commit-graph.c. The REACHABLE flag is only used when
writing a commit-graph file, and a revision walk using --show-pulls
does not happen in the same process. Care must be taken in the future
to ensure this remains the case.
Update Documentation/rev-list-options.txt with significant details
around this option. This requires updating the example in the
History Simplification section to demonstrate some of the problems
with TREESAME second parents.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Before, `--autostash` only worked with `git pull --rebase`. However, in
the last patch, merge learned `--autostash` as well so there's no reason
why we should have this restriction anymore. Teach pull to pass
`--autostash` to merge, just like it did for rebase.
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In rebase, one can pass the `--autostash` option to cause the worktree
to be automatically stashed before continuing with the rebase. This
option is missing in merge, however.
Implement the `--autostash` option and corresponding `merge.autoStash`
option in merge which stashes before merging and then pops after.
This option is useful when a developer has some local changes on a topic
branch but they realize that their work depends on another branch.
Previously, they had to run something like
git fetch ...
git stash push
git merge FETCH_HEAD
git stash pop
but now, that is reduced to
git fetch ...
git merge --autostash FETCH_HEAD
When an autostash is generated, it is automatically reapplied to the
worktree only in three explicit situations:
1. An incomplete merge is commit using `git commit`.
2. A merge completes successfully.
3. A merge is aborted using `git merge --abort`.
In all other situations where the merge state is removed using
remove_merge_branch_state() such as aborting a merge via
`git reset --hard`, the autostash is saved into the stash reflog
instead keeping the worktree clean.
Helped-by: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Suggested-by: Alban Gruin <alban.gruin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Commit 1925fe0c8a ("Documentation: wrap config listings in "----"",
2019-09-07) wrapped this fairly large block of example config directives
in "----". The closing "----" ended up a few lines too early though.
Make sure to include the trailing "IncludeIf.onbranch:..." example, too.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When commit subjects or authors have non-ASCII characters, git
format-patch Q-encodes them so they can be safely sent over email.
However, if the patch transfer method is something other than email (web
review tools, sneakernet), this only serves to make the patch metadata
harder to read without first applying it (unless you can decode RFC 2047
in your head). git am as well as some email software supports
non-Q-encoded mail as described in RFC 6531.
Add --[no-]encode-email-headers and format.encodeEmailHeaders to let the
user control this behavior.
Signed-off-by: Emma Brooks <me@pluvano.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The documentation refers to "initialized" or "populated" submodules,
to explain which submodules are affected by '--recurse-submodules', but
the real terminology here is 'active' submodules. Update the
documentation accordingly.
Some terminology:
- Active is defined in gitsubmodules(7), it only involves the
configuration variables 'submodule.active', 'submodule.<name>.active'
and 'submodule.<name>.url'. The function
submodule.c::is_submodule_active checks that a submodule is active.
- Populated means that the submodule's working tree is present (and the
gitfile correctly points to the submodule repository), i.e. either the
superproject was cloned with ` --recurse-submodules`, or the user ran
`git submodule update --init`, or `git submodule init [<path>]` and
`git submodule update [<path>]` separately which populated the
submodule working tree. This does not involve the 3 configuration
variables above.
- Initialized (at least in the context of the man pages involved in this
patch) means both "populated" and "active" as defined above, i.e. what
`git submodule update --init` does.
The --recurse-submodules option mostly affects active submodules. An
exception is `git fetch` where the option affects populated submodules.
As a consequence, in `git pull --recurse-submodules` the fetch affects
populated submodules, but the resulting working tree update only affects
active submodules.
In the documentation of `git-pull`, let's distinguish between the
fetching part which affects populated submodules, and the updating of
worktrees, which only affects active submodules.
Signed-off-by: Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert+git@gmail.com>
Helped-by: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The default value also depends on the value of submodule.recurse.
Use this opportunity to correct some grammar mistakes in
Documentation/config/fetch.txt signaled by Robert P. J. Day.
Also mention `fetch.recurseSubmodules` in fetch-options.txt. In
git-push.txt, `push.recurseSubmodules` is implicitly mentioned (by
explaining how to disable it), so no need to add it there.
Lastly add a link to `git-fetch` in `git-pull.txt` to explain the
meaning of `--recurse-submodules` there.
Signed-off-by: Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert+git@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Also unify the formulation about --no-recurse-submodules for checkout
and switch, which we reuse for restore.
And correct the formulation about submodules' HEAD in read-tree, which
we reuse in reset.
Signed-off-by: Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert+git@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Note that `ls-files` is not affected, even though it has a
`--recurse-submodules` option, so list it as an exception too.
Signed-off-by: Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert+git@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add --changed-paths option to git commit-graph write. This option will
allow users to compute information about the paths that have changed
between a commit and its first parent, and write it into the commit graph
file. If the option is passed to the write subcommand we set the
COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_BLOOM_FILTERS flag and pass it down to the
commit-graph logic.
Helped-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Garima Singh <garima.singh@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Update the technical documentation for commit-graph-format with
the formats for the Bloom filter index (BIDX) and Bloom filter
data (BDAT) chunks. Write the computed Bloom filters information
to the commit graph file using this format.
Helped-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Garima Singh <garima.singh@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since f269048754 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs,
2013-05-11), the underlying `git fetch` in `git pull <remote> <branch>`
updates the configured remote-tracking branch for <branch>.
However, an example in the 'Examples' section of the `git pull`
documentation still states that this is not the case.
Correct the description of this example.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The documentation for the `<refspec>` parameter in the `git fetch`
documentation refers to the section "CONFIGURED REMOTE-TRACKING
BRANCHES" in this same documentation page.
In the `git pull` documentation, let's also refer specifically to this
section instead of just linking to the `git fetch` documentation.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Blain <levraiphilippeblain@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
For more discussion about these hooks, their history relative to rebase,
and logical consistency between different types of operations, see
https://lore.kernel.org/git/CABPp-BG0bFKUage5cN_2yr2DkmS04W2Z9Pg5WcROqHznV3XBdw@mail.gmail.com/
and the links to some threads referenced therein.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Merge with --gpg-sign option, and clarify that --no-gpg-sign also
override earlier --gpg-sign.
Signed-off-by: Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
{cherry-pick,revert} --edit hasn't honoured --no-gpg-sign yet.
Pass this option down to git-commit to honour it.
Signed-off-by: Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The git-update-ref(1) command can only handle queueing transactions
right now via its "--stdin" parameter, but there is no way for users to
handle the transaction itself in a more explicit way. E.g. in a
replicated scenario, one may imagine a coordinator that spawns
git-update-ref(1) for multiple repositories and only if all agree that
an update is possible will the coordinator send a commit. Such a
transactional session could look like
> start
< start: ok
> update refs/heads/master $OLD $NEW
> prepare
< prepare: ok
# All nodes have returned "ok"
> commit
< commit: ok
or
> start
< start: ok
> create refs/heads/master $OLD $NEW
> prepare
< fatal: cannot lock ref 'refs/heads/master': reference already exists
# On all other nodes:
> abort
< abort: ok
In order to allow for such transactional sessions, this commit
introduces four new commands for git-update-ref(1), which matches those
we have internally already with the exception of "start":
- start: start a new transaction
- prepare: prepare the transaction, that is try to lock all
references and verify their current value matches the
expected one
- commit: explicitly commit a session, that is update references to
match their new expected state
- abort: abort a session and roll back all changes
By design, git-update-ref(1) will commit as soon as standard input is
being closed. While fine in a non-transactional world, it is definitely
unexpected in a transactional world. Because of this, as soon as any of
the new transactional commands is used, the default will change to
aborting without an explicit "commit". To avoid a race between queueing
updates and the first "prepare" that starts a transaction, the "start"
command has been added to start an explicit transaction.
Add some tests to exercise this new functionality.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is the config file we use when we build the user manual with
AsciiDoc. The comment at the top of this chunk that we're removing says
the following:
"unbreak" docbook-xsl v1.68 for manpages (sic!). v1.69 works with or
without this.
This comes from d19fbc3c17 ("Documentation: add git user's manual",
2007-01-07), where it looks like this conf file in general and this
snippet in particular was copy-pasted from asciidoc.conf.
This chunk is very similar to something we just got rid of for the
manpages, and because this appears to be aimed at v1.68 -- which we no
longer support for the manpages as of a few commits ago --, it's
tempting to get rid of this. That reveals an interesting aspect of
"works with or without this": it turns out it actually works /better/
without!
Dropping this makes us render code snippets and shell listings using
<screen> rather than <literallayout>, just like Asciidoctor does. In
user-manual.pdf, this puts the contents into dimmed-background,
easy-to-distinguish-from-the-surrounding-text boxes, as opposed to
white-background (transparent) boxes.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the given example, `commit` cannot be `NULL` (because this is the
loop condition: if it was `NULL`, the loop body would not be entered at
all). It took this developer a moment or two to see that this is
therefore dead code.
Let's remove it, to avoid puzzling future readers.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Git is an enormously flexible and powerful piece of software. However,
it can be intimidating for many users and there are a set of common
questions that users often ask. While we already have some new user
documentation, it's worth adding a FAQ to address common questions that
users often have. Even though some of this is addressed elsewhere in
the documentation, experience has shown that it is difficult for users
to find, so a centralized location is helpful.
Add such a FAQ and fill it with some common questions and answers.
While there are few entries now, we can expand it in the future to cover
more things as we find new questions that users have. Let's also add
section markers so that people answering questions can directly link
users to the proper answer.
The FAQ also addresses common configuration questions that apply not
only to Git as an independent piece of software but also the ecosystem
of CI tools and hosting providers that people use, since these are the
source of common questions. An attempt has been made to avoid
mentioning any particular provider or tool, but to nevertheless cover
common configurations that apply to a wide variety of such tools.
Note that the long lines for certain questions are required, since
Asciidoctor does not permit broken lines there.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The description for the "verify" command is lacking a single word "is",
which this commit corrects.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
After an earlier commit, we only include manpage-base.xsl from a single
file, manpage-normal.xsl. Fold the former into the latter.
We only ever needed the "base, normal and non-normal" construct to
support a single non-normal case, namely to work around issues with
docbook-xsl 1.72 handling backslashes and dots. If we ever need
something like this again, we can re-introduce manpage-base.xsl and
friends. Whatever issue we'd be trying to work around, it probably
wouldn't involve dots and backslashes like this, anyway.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We used to assign git.docbook.backslash one of two different values --
one "normal" and one for working around a problem with docbook-xsl 1.72.
After the previous commit, we don't support that version anymore and
always use the "normal" value, a literal backslash.
Just explicitly use a backslash instead of using git.docbook.backslash.
The next commit will drop the definition of git.docbook.backslash
entirely.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Drop the DOCBOOK_XSL_172 config knob, which was needed with docbook-xsl
1.72 (but neither 1.71 nor 1.73). Version 1.73.0 is more than twelve
years old.
Together with the last few commits, we are now at a point where we don't
have any Makefile knobs to cater to old/broken versions of docbook-xsl.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
docbook-xsl 1.72.0 is thirteen years old. Drop the ASCIIDOC_ROFF knob
which was needed to support 1.68.1 - 1.71.1. The next commit will
increase the required/assumed version further.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Drop the DOCBOOK_SUPPRESS_SP mechanism, which needs to be used with
docbook-xsl versions 1.69.1 through 1.71.0.
We probably broke this for Asciidoctor builds in f6461b82b9
("Documentation: fix build with Asciidoctor 2", 2019-09-15). That is, we
should/could fix this similar to 55aca515eb ("manpage-bold-literal.xsl:
match for namespaced "d:literal" in template", 2019-10-31). But rather
than digging out such an old version of docbook-xsl to test that, let's
just use this as an excuse for dropping this decade-old workaround.
DOCBOOK_SUPPRESS_SP was not needed with docbook-xsl 1.69.0 and older.
Maybe such old versions still work fine on our docs, or maybe not. Let's
just refer to everything before 1.71.1 as "not supported". The next
commit will increase the required/assumed version further.
Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The construct has been in POSIX for the past 10+ years, and we have
used in t9xxx (subversion) series of the tests, so we know it is at
portable across systems that people have run those tests, which is
almost everything we'd care about.
Let's loosen the rule; luckily, the check-non-portable-shell script
does not have any rule to find its use, so the only change needed is
a removal of one paragraph from the documentation.
Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
'git pull' implicitly passes --update-head-ok to 'git fetch', but
doesn't itself accept that option from users. That makes sense, as it
wouldn't work without the possibility to update HEAD. Remove the option
from the command's documentation to match its actual behavior.
Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
If commands like merge or rebase materialize files as part of their work,
or a previous sparse-checkout command failed to update individual files
due to dirty changes, users may want a command to simply 'reapply' the
sparsity rules. Provide one.
Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Emily Shaffer