Re: Wishlist for a bundle-only transport mode

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Nov 23, 2007, 09:31 UTC
Message-ID: <7vejehux3y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <200711231018.49322.jnareb@gmail.com>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 24 quoted lines

> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano :
>> "Santi Béjar" <sbejar@gmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> Sorry but I do not understand this. I think this two lines could be equivalent:
>>>
>>> git push --bundle bundle.bdl "refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/bundle/master"
>>> git bundle create bundle.bdl refs/heads/master ^refs/remotes/bundle/master
>> 
>> Interesting.
>> 
>> 	$ git push $something ours:theirs
>> 
>> has defined semantics for any value of $something.
>> ...
>> If bundle.bdl does not exist yet, it is like pushing into a
>> freshly initialized empty repository.
>
> But for that I think "git bundle" should learn new subcommand:
> "git bundle update", which would use refs existing in given
> bundle as prerequisites, and either update bundle (create anew
> or just concatenate next pack) or create incremental bundle.
>
> Something similar to incremental mode or update command of
> archivers...

I was disagreeing with Santi's "'push --bundle' and 'bundle create' can be equivalent". They can't be, as "push" is always "update" and never "create". So I do not quite get your "But for that I think"; I think you are just agreeing with me.

Even if we taught "push" to create (which I doubt would happen due to its security and administrative implications), it would not make the two any closer to being equivalent. For them to become equivalent, we would need to have "push" unlearn how to update, which would never happen ;-).