From: Daniel Barkalow Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 03:25:32 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow update hooks to update refs on their own Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <49EB8C6F-8100-48C1-BB2D-A8F6023BACAD@midwinter.com> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Steven Grimm wrote: > On Nov 27, 2007, at 5:19 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > >How does this interact with the "pretend to have fetched back > >immediately" supported by modern git-push? > > > That continues to fire, but it updates the local tracking ref to point to the > SHA1 that was pushed, which isn't the actual remote ref. So you have to do a > real fetch to get the local tracking ref pointed to the right place. In other > words, that feature doesn't do any good in this context, but it doesn't really > hurt anything either. > > It would of course be better if git-push could notice that it needs to do an > actual fetch. I think it'd be sufficient to transmit the final remote ref SHA1 > back to git-push, and if it doesn't match what was pushed, that's a sign that > a fetch is needed. But that change wouldn't be mutually exclusive with this > patch, I believe. Couldn't you do this with a status message? ("ok changed by hook" or something.) I disagree that the feature doesn't do any good; it records that the state of the remote is at least as new as the local state, so you can tell without a network connection that you don't have any local changes you haven't sent off. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank*