Re: name-rev: anchor pattern without --exclude?

From: Bryan Turner <bturner@atlassian.com>
Date: Jul 6, 2017, 18:02 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGyf7-HiwR+CDtDCvQ7q9Dd_TYfvN0133UOYTO65F=4qOHqy9w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87h8yptr7t.fsf@kyleam.com>

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>> Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com> writes:
>
>> What is the answer desired by your application when two or more
>> branches point at the same commit you are interested in?  Pick one at
>> random?  An error saying it cannot decide where to place the snapshot?
>
> Our use of name-rev is just to get a friendly name for a hash.  If two
> branches point to the same commit, we're fine with whatever decision
> "git name-rev" makes; we just want to limit it to refs in the
> "refs/heads/" namespace.

If you don't need the ancestor traversals "git name-rev" provides, "git for-each-ref --count 1 --format "%(refname:short)" --points-at <hash> refs/heads/" might work. That only goes back to Git 2.7.0, though; still quite a ways off your 1.9 target. ("git branch --points-at" does the same thing, I should add, and only for branches, but you can't directly limit its output like you can with "for-each-ref".. Perhaps that doesn't matter for your use case.) If you want names like "master~2", from your example, though, "--points-at" won't do what you need.

Bryan

>
> --
> Kyle