Re: [wishlist] git branch -d -r remotename
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Mar 19, 2007, 06:18 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v8xdtkb7p.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <45FDB322.10904@vilain.net>
Sam Vilain <sam@vilain.net> writes:
> It doesn't do that because the head doesn't match any revision that was > given to us by `rev-list refs/remotes/foo/*`
Gaah. That goes all the way down to the root commit.
+ print "fetching revs for ".@refs." remote refs\n";
Is this meant to be final message to the end-user, or debug?
+ my %r = map { ($_ => undef) } + $git->command("rev-list", @refs);
This traverses all the way down to the root commit, doesn't it?
That is probably good enough for a toy repository for testing, but is impractical in real repositories, I am afraid. See below for the standard ways to check ancestry.
+ # don't delete the current branch + my ($checked_out) = $git->command(qw(symbolic-ref HEAD));
When the HEAD is detached, does the error message go directly to the end user?
+ while ( my ($ref, $rev) = each %l ) {
+ next if $checked_out and $ref eq $checked_out;
+ if ( exists $r{$rev} ) {
+ print "$ref is obsolete\n";
+ $git->command(qw(update-ref -d), $ref, $rev);
+ }
+ }
The standard way to check if commit A is included in (i.e. is an
ancestor of) commit B, without traversing the ancestry chain of
B all the way down to the root commit, is to run:git merge-base --all A B
and see if A appears in its output (if so, then A is an ancestor of B, otherwise it is not). This is a pair-wise check, and for your purpose the check would become N*M operation (Yuck).
The same check can be done in parallel with:
git show-branch --independent A B C D...
whose output would include A if the commit is not included in any of the other commits B C D... This parallel traversal has a limit --- you can only check 25 branches at a time.
Show 20 quoted lines
>> If the above is the usage scenario you are trying to help, then >> wouldn't it be helpful if you could also help removing 'my-next' >> in this slightly altered example? >> >> $ git clone >> ... time passes ... >> $ git checkout -b my-next origin/next >> ... build, install, have fun ... >> $ git checkout master >> ... time passes ... >> $ git branch >> ... notice that you do not hack on your copy of 'next' >> ... which is 'my-next', and want to remove it >> $ git remote prune -c > > Yes, the idea was to "sweep" all branches that were just local branches > of a remote and never worked on. This is most useful right now for > people switching from Cogito or old-style remotes, who have a lot of > branches that are remote tracking branches. Using this, they can just > set up a new remote, fetch and prune -c and be left in a tidy state.
You make it sound like this is just a one-shot conversion issue, in which case I really doubt we would want that. But it appears to be a useful feature in general, provided if the assumed use case is described clearly so that new users know when to use it. In the form that was given to me, I think the documentation leaves the user in a "Huh?" state.