Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] receive-pack: handle reference deletions separately
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jun 12, 2025, 20:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq8qlwd775.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAP8UFD0Az9YUd7tHbCWjrZ5bTv1V_0RZ2azasPmOrpf+ARMjug@mail.gmail.com>
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 16 quoted lines
>> when a user pushes multiple branches such as: >> >> delete refs/heads/branch/conflict >> create refs/heads/branch >> >> Before using batched updates, the references would be applied >> sequentially and hence no conflicts would arise. With batched updates, >> while the first update applies, the second fails due to F/D conflict. > > Nit: it looks like "D/F conflict" is more often used than "F/D > conflict" in the Git code base: > > $ git grep -i 'd/f conflict' | wc -l > 119 > $ git grep -i 'f/d conflict' | wc -l > 7
I do not mind calling a situation F/D conflict if you have a file and your attempt to create a directory at the same path fails (as opposed to D/F where directory exists and you cannot overwrite it with a file), but the above case does sound like a D/F conflict that deletes directory r/h/b (by removing the last subpath in it), which is OK, and creates file r/h/b, which the all-or-nothing machinery does not allow well, so calling D/F may probably be more in line with the existing practice, regardless of which situation we more commonly talk about in the code base.