From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 19:16:43 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] notes: teach git-notes about notes.<ref>.merge option
Message-ID: <CA+P7+xournf+1Cqnr-AAO+EzUee3KfEevFQLhXkqyfQGBvPRpQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqa8twl3x9.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> I know that we don't yet have a "proper" place to put remote notes refs,
>>>> but the <ref> in notes.<ref>.merge _must_ be a "local" notes ref (you even
>>>> use the <localref> notation in the documentation below). Thus, I believe
>>>> we can presume that the local notes ref must live under refs/notes/*,
>>>> and hence drop the "refs/notes/" prefix from the config key (just like
>>>> branch.<name>.* can presume that <name> lives under refs/heads/*).
>>>
>>> I am OK going in that direction, as long as we promise that "notes
>>> merge" will forever refuse to work on --notes=$ref where $ref does
>>> not begin with refs/notes/.
>>
>> It appears that notes merge already allows operating on refs not in "refs/notes"
>
> If that is the case, then the only sane choice left to us is to
> accept only fully qualified refname, e.g. refs/notes/commit, in
> notes.<ref>.mergestrategy, without shortening, I would think.

Oh interesting. I did a test. If you provide a fully qualified ref not
inside refs/notes, then it assumes you meant refs/notes/refs/foo/y
rather than refs/foo/y

I need to do some more digging on this to determine the exact thing going on...

Regards,
Jake