Re: [PATCH] branch: Forbid to create local branches with confusing names
- From
- Ingo Rohloff <ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com>
- Date
- Nov 8, 2019, 12:45 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20191108134536.43d6e476@ingpc3.intern.lauterbach.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq36ezoz6i.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Hello Junio,
Show 6 quoted lines
> > I think I did not explain the intention that well. > > What I basically want to avoid is a situation in which there is > > no way at all to refer unambiguously to a particular reference. > > Hmph, I thought this was a solved problem, but maybe I am still > misunderstanding you.
You are right, this is partly solved: Deleting such a reference to a local branch is always possible. But these kind of problems are not solved fully.
To explain my issue more concisely: I start in any "regular" git repository. Regular == Repository was cloned from somewhere so a remote named "origin" and a remote-tracking branch named "origin/master" do exist.
I fire off the following four commands (Yes: This is malicious and stupid ;-))
git checkout master git branch origin/master git branch remotes/origin/master git branch refs/remotes/origin/master
git does not complain at all here.
Then I try the following three commands.
git branch somework origin/master
warning: refname 'origin/master' is ambiguous.
fatal: Ambiguous object name: 'origin/master'. git branch somework remotes/origin/master
warning: refname 'remotes/origin/master' is ambiguous.
fatal: Ambiguous object name: 'remotes/origin/master'. git branch somework refs/remotes/origin/master
warning: refname 'refs/remotes/origin/master' is ambiguous.
fatal: Ambiguous object name: 'refs/remotes/origin/master'.QUESTION: I think I am lost now. That's where I might have overlooked something ?
I might continue with (this is the solved case):
git branch -d refs/remotes/origin/master
Deleted branch refs/remotes/origin/master (was 3454f30).Sounds rather scary (because this sounds like you deleted a remote-tracking branch), but actually does the right thing I guess. (The command deletes refs/heads/refs/remotes/origin/master)
After which this succeeds:
git branch somework refs/remotes/origin/master
Branch 'somework' set up to track remote branch 'master' from 'origin'.PATCH: Make this fail:
git branch refs/remotes/origin/master
fatal: Invalid new branch name: 'refs/remotes/origin/master'This avoids the failure for
git branch somework refs/remotes/origin/master
and to avoid very similar issues make these fail too:
git tag -m "a tag" refs/remotes/origin/master
fatal: Invalid new tag name: 'refs/remotes/origin/master' git remote add refs/heads ssh://ds1/home/irohloff/git/gcc_build.git
fatal: Invalid new remote name: 'refs/heads'All of these examples use really pathological names for tags/remotes/branches. I cannot believe that anyone wants to do this intentionally.
QUESTION: Are there more user created, command line specified refnames in addition to tags/remotes/branches ?
If you have time:
Some more background.
The whole idea behind the patch:
Make sure "refs/" is a "unique" prefix, which only
appears as ".git/refs/".
This should ensure that "refs/" only matches
to the very first entry from:
static const char *ref_rev_parse_rules[] = {
"%.*s",
"refs/%.*s",
"refs/tags/%.*s",
"refs/heads/%.*s",
"refs/remotes/%.*s",
"refs/remotes/%.*s/HEAD",
NULL
}; So goal: Make sure refs/refs/* does not exist refs/tags/refs/* does not exist refs/heads/refs/* does not exist refs/remotes/refs/* does not exist
To avoid the existence of refs/remotes/refs/* it is necessary to also prohibit a standalone "refs" as remote name (not just "refs/*"); and to handle that more easily I also prohibit a standalone "refs" for tags and branches.
Of course you might still create all these nasty subdirs with plumbing. I try to avoid that this is done with porcelain. (At least that's as far as I understand git terminology.) Of course future git extensions might try to create something like .git/refs/refs/* but since these extensions are reviewed, I guess it is easy to nudge authors of extensions (like git-svn, git-bisect, ...) to NOT do this.
so long Ingo
PS: I really think per default more prefixes than just "refs/" should be forbidden when creating tags/remotes/branches. But I also agree with you that this is much less straight forward (Which prefixes to forbid ? Config option ? How much does this break ? ...). As far as I can tell tags/remotes/branches, which are called "refs/*" or "refs" are completely pathological; I think unconditionally forbidding to create these kind of refnames for tags/remotes/branches with porcelain is OK.
BTW: This is also quite confusing (but does not really hurt and is consistent with what you described)
git branch -r -d refs/remotes/origin/master
error: remote-tracking branch 'refs/remotes/origin/master' not found.What is meant here is I think
remote-tracking branch 'refs/remotes/refs/remotes/origin/master' not found.