Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] branch: report invalid tracking branch as broken

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 15, 2013, 22:54 UTC
Message-ID: <7vzjsio99d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <8db143908bc969bbe1d720479fb6214729f7b1ae.1376590264.git.worldhello.net@gmail.com>

Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

>  /*
> - * Return false if cannot stat a tracking branch (not exist or invalid),
> - * otherwise true.
> + * Compare a branch with its tracking branch, and save their differences
> + * (number of commits) in *num_ours and *num_theirs.
> + *
> + * Return 0 if branch has no upstream, -1 if upstream is missing or invalid,
> + * otherwise 1.
>   */

What is the difference between a branch that has no upstream and upstream being missing? Or between missing and invalid?

I think you are trying to say the difference between "branch.<name>.merge is not set at all" and "branch.<name>.merge is in the configuration, but the named upstream ref does not exist".

You are calling the latter "missing or invalid", but how does one tell missing ones from invalid ones? I think there isn't a distinction, so it would be better to just say "missing" (or "gone", which is very much more likely reason why you still have configuration without a ref).

I am not sure it is a good idea to label "missing" as "broken" or "invalid", but it seems that your tests, in code comments and variable names are full of these negative connotations.

Hmph...