git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [PATCH] clone: add remote.cloneDefault config option

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Aug 26, 2020, 18:46 UTC
Message-ID
<xmqqlfi1utwi.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To
<pull.710.git.1598456751674.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
"Sean Barag via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 6 quoted lines
> From: Sean Barag <sean@barag.org>
>
> While the default remote name of `origin` can be overridden both
> pre-clone (with `git clone --origin foo`) and post-clone (with `git
> remote rename origin foo`), it'd be handy to have a configurable
> system-wide default for clones!  

I doubt it is handy enough to deserve an explamation point. Replace it with a plain-vanilla full-stop instead.

I however tend to agree that, even evidenced by the manual page description of "git clone", i.e.

    -o <name>::
    --origin <name>::
            Instead of using the remote name `origin` to keep track
            of the upstream repository, use `<name>`.

that it is understandable if many users and projects wish to call it "upstream".

> This commit implements
> `remote.cloneDefault` as a parallel to `remote.pushDefault`,
> with prioritized name resolution:

I highly doubt that .cloneDefault is a good name. After reading only the title of the patch e-mail, i.e. when the only available information on the change available to me was the name of the configuration variable and the fact that it pertains to the command "git clone", I thought it is to specify a URL, from which "git clone" without the URL would clone from that single repository.

And the name will cause the same misunderstanding to normal users, not just to reviewers of your patch, after this change hits a future Git release.

Taking a parallel from init.defaultBranchName, I would probably call it clone.defaultUpstreamName if I were writing this feature.

Show 30 quoted lines
> diff --git a/builtin/clone.c b/builtin/clone.c
> index b087ee40c2..b0dbb848c6 100644
> --- a/builtin/clone.c
> +++ b/builtin/clone.c
> @@ -941,6 +941,29 @@ static int path_exists(const char *path)
>  	return !stat(path, &sb);
>  }
>  
> +struct clone_default_info
> +{
> +	enum config_scope scope;
> +	struct strbuf remote_name;
> +	int linenr;
> +};
> +
> +static int config_read_clone_default(const char *key, const char *value,
> +	void *cb)
> +{
> +	struct clone_default_info* info = cb;
> +	if (strcmp(key, "remote.clonedefault") || !value) {
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +
> +	info->scope = current_config_scope();
> +	strbuf_reset(&info->remote_name);
> +	strbuf_addstr(&info->remote_name, value);
> +	info->linenr = current_config_line();
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

This feels way overkill and insufficient at the same time. It does not need scope, it does not need linenr, and we already have a place to store end-user specified name for the upstream in the form of the variable option_origin. And the code is not diagnosing any error.

static int git_clone_config(const char *k, const char *v, void *cb)
{
	if (option_origin)
		return 0; /* ignore -- the user gave us an option */
	if (!strcmp(k, "clone.defaultupstreamname")) {
		if (!v)
			return config_error_nonbool(k);
		if (strchr(v, '/') || check_refname_format(v, REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL))
                	return error(_("invalid upstream name '%s'"), v);
		option_origin = xstrdup(v);
		return 0;
	}
	return 0;
}

would be sufficient, and at the same time makes sure it rejects names like 'o..ri..gin', 'o/ri/gin', etc.

Show 15 quoted lines
> @@ -992,8 +1015,15 @@ int cmd_clone(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  		option_no_checkout = 1;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!option_origin)
> -		option_origin = "origin";
> +	if (!option_origin) {
> +		struct clone_default_info clone_default = { CONFIG_SCOPE_UNKNOWN, STRBUF_INIT, -1 };
> +		git_config(config_read_clone_default, &clone_default);
> +		if (strcmp("", (const char*) clone_default.remote_name.buf))
> +			option_origin = clone_default.remote_name.buf;
> +		else
> +			option_origin = "origin";
> +	}
> +

It is somewhat sad that we have the git_config(git_default_config) call so late in the control flow. I wonder if we can update the start-up sequence to match the usual flow, e.g. these things happen in the following order in a normal program.

    - variables are given their default value.
    - call git_config(git_commandspecific_config, ...) early in the
      program.
      - git_commandspecific_config() interprets the command specific
        variables and passes everything else to git_default_config()
      variables like option_origin are given values of configuration
      variable at this point.
    - call parse_options() next, which may override the variables
      from the value on the command line.
    - main control flow uses the variable.  "Command-line wins over
      configuration which wins over the default" falls out naturally.

One oddity "git clone" has is that it wants to delay the reading of configuration files (they are read only once, and second and subsequent git_config() calls will reuse what was read before [*]) so that it can read what clone.c::write_config() wrote, so if we were to "fix" the start-up sequence to match the usual flow, we need to satisfy what that odd arrangement wanted to achieve in some other way (e.g. feed what is in option_config to git_default_config ourselves, without using git_config(), as part of the "main control flow uses the variable" part), but it should be doable.

	[*Side note*].  The above means that this patch, even when
	the configuration variable does not give upstream name, may
	break the option_config feature by breaking the second call
	to git_config().  We need to have a test for that.
Show 21 quoted lines
> diff --git a/t/t5606-clone-options.sh b/t/t5606-clone-options.sh
> index e69427f881..8aac67b385 100755
> --- a/t/t5606-clone-options.sh
> +++ b/t/t5606-clone-options.sh
> @@ -19,6 +19,20 @@ test_expect_success 'clone -o' '
>  
>  '
>  
> +test_expect_success 'clone respects remote.cloneDefault' '
> +
> +	git -c remote.cloneDefault=bar clone parent clone-config &&
> +	(cd clone-config && git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/bar/master)
> +
> +'
> +
> +test_expect_success 'clone chooses correct remote name' '
> +
> +	git -c remote.cloneDefault=bar clone -o foo parent clone-o-and-config &&
> +	(cd clone-o-and-config && git rev-parse --verify refs/remotes/foo/master)
> +
> +'

These two are "showing off my shiny new toy" tests, which are needed, but we also need negative tests where the shiny new toy does not kick in when it should not. For example

	git -c remote.cloneDefault="bad.../...name" clone parent
should fail, no?
Thanks.
Previous: Sean Barag via GitGitGadgetNext: Derrick Stolee
Message 2 of 7 in “clone: add remote.cloneDefault config option”
  1. clone: add remote.cloneDefault config optionSean Barag via GitGitGadget, Aug 26, 2020
  2. Junio C HamanoAug 26, 2020
  3. Derrick StoleeAug 26, 2020
  4. Junio C HamanoAug 26, 2020
  5. Sean BaragAug 27, 2020
  6. Junio C HamanoAug 27, 2020
  7. Sean BaragAug 27, 2020

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.