[PATCH 2/2] send-pack: print "maybe you need to pull" hint

From

Jeff King <peff@peff.net>

Date

Nov 20, 2007, 11:21 UTC

Message-ID

<20071120112146.GB7814@sigill.intra.peff.net>

In-Reply-To

<20071120111317.GA4120@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
I am slightly negative on this patch, just because I always found that
particular warning a bit ugly (and the new output is so nice and
compact). But for new users, perhaps the extra hint is helpful?

If we do want the warning, then other options include:
  - listing each non-fast forward, as Alex's original patch did; this
    seems kind of pointless given that they are clustered at the bottom
    already
  - possibly cluster non-fast forwards differently from other errors in
    the output
  - tweak the text

 builtin-send-pack.c |    9 +++++++++
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin-send-pack.c b/builtin-send-pack.c
index f1cdb97..4bfa847 100644
--- a/builtin-send-pack.c
+++ b/builtin-send-pack.c
@@ -341,6 +341,7 @@ static void print_push_status(const char *dest, struct ref *refs)
 {
 	struct ref *ref;
 	int n = 0;
+	int nonff = 0;
 
 	if (args.verbose) {
 		for (ref = refs; ref; ref = ref->next)
@@ -357,7 +358,15 @@ static void print_push_status(const char *dest, struct ref *refs)
 		    ref->status != REF_STATUS_UPTODATE &&
 		    ref->status != REF_STATUS_OK)
 			n += print_one_push_status(ref, dest, n);
+		if (ref->status == REF_STATUS_REJECT_NONFASTFORWARD)
+			nonff++;
 	}
+
+	if (nonff)
+		error("%d remote refs were not ancestors of their "
+		      "corresponding local ref\n"
+		      "Maybe you are not up-to-date and need to pull first?",
+		      nonff);
 }
 
 static int refs_pushed(struct ref *ref)

-- 
1.5.3.6.1784.gd1b1d-dirty