Re: [RFC PATCH] hooks--pre-push.sample: identify branch point

From: Antoine Beaupré <anarcat@debian.org>
Date: Mar 12, 2023, 18:14 UTC
Message-ID: <87lek1suqb.fsf@angela.anarc.at>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s30GBC7PFovzgaORMLLGYW=1mFVG4WH-dUfUW5-1sMd1Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 2023-03-10 16:09:43, Felipe Contreras wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 10:28 AM Antoine Beaupré <anarcat@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 2023-03-09 17:22:55, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> > Hi Antoine,
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 4:34 PM Antoine Beaupré <anarcat@debian.org> wrote:
>> >

[...]

Show 26 quoted lines

>> > It's interesting how we keep coming back to the same problems; right
>> > now there's a discussion in the git-users mailing list precisely about
>> > the same topic: how to find the branch point, in particular so `git
>> > name-rev` shows the correct branch a commit belongs to (which is
>> > otherwise just a bad guess).
>>
>> Well, it's a need people certainly seem to have. :)
>>
>> I feel we are letting perfection be the enemy of good here. No, there
>> are no solutions that work for the general case, you always find a
>> corner case that breaks it. But what if we could have a simple solution
>> that works for *most* cases and then *fails* gracefully for the corner
>> cases?
>
> I did propose such a solution, I wrote extensive tests to make sure it
> worked properly, but it was largely ignored [2].
>
> The solution with --exclude-first-parent-only fails my tests in a very
> complex case:
>
>    X (master)
>     \
>      A (topic)
>
> Sure, it's probably easy to fix, but the point is that a reliable and
> robust solution everyone agrees with doesn't exist.

Hm... that's odd, I'm surprised that doesn't work. But that's certainly a "special" (!) case that should be handled properly.

[...]

Show 6 quoted lines

>> Or they could even have a per-branch .git/config entry to map the branch
>> to an upstream branch, and *that* could even "default" to "main" or
>> whatever that setting is called now. :)
>
> Sounds like you are talking about the upstream tracking branch [3].
> Are you familiar with that?

No, I'm not refering to branch.NAME.upstream here, sorry if my use of "upstream" here was confusing. I mean "the branch this branch has been forked from" not "the upstream equivalent to this local branch".

a.

-- 
Science knows still practically nothing about the real nature of
matter, energy, dimension, or time; and even less about those
remarkable things called life and thought. But whatever the meaning
and purpose of this universe, you are a legitimate part of it.
                        - Gene Roddenberry