From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 18:53:18 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] push: clarify rejection of update to non-commit-ish
Message-ID: <7vk3t8ryap.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1353644515-17349-8-git-send-email-chris@rorvick.com>

Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com> writes:

> Pushes must already (by default) update to a commit-ish due the fast-
> forward check in set_ref_status_for_push().  But rejecting for not being
> a fast-forward suggests the situation can be resolved with a merge.
> Flag these updates (i.e., to a blob or a tree) as not forwardable so the
> user is presented with more appropriate advice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Rorvick <chris@rorvick.com>
> ---
>  remote.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
> index f5bc4e7..ee0c1e5 100644
> --- a/remote.c
> +++ b/remote.c
> @@ -1291,6 +1291,11 @@ static inline int is_forwardable(struct ref* ref)
>  	if (!o || o->type != OBJ_COMMIT)
>  		return 0;
>  
> +	/* new object must be commit-ish */
> +	o = deref_tag(parse_object(ref->new_sha1), NULL, 0);
> +	if (!o || o->type != OBJ_COMMIT)
> +		return 0;
> +

I think the original code used ref_newer() which took commit-ish on
both sides.

With this code, the old must be a commit but new can be a tag that
points at a commit?  Why?