Re: [PATCH] transport submodules: correct error message
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jan 18, 2017, 00:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqr341b4vm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAGZ79kYu1Y2pwk9+kbSrMxwP3S0n8FMW6f4wdEE0mrACqrOPNA@mail.gmail.com>
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>>
>>> Trying to push with --recurse-submodules=on-demand would run into
>>> the same problem. To fix this issue
>>> 1) specifically mention that we looked for branches on the remote.
>>
>> That makes an incorrect statement ("not found on any remote"---we
>> did not inspect all of the said remote, only heads and tags) into an
>> irrelevant statement ("not found on any remote branch"---the end
>> user would say "so what? I know it exists there, it's just that not
>> all remote refs have corresponding tracking ref locally on our side").
>
> eh. So to be correct we need to tell the user we did not find any match on
> a "remote-tracking branch" as the gitglossary puts it.I think the updated text is already "correct". I am pointing out that it may be correct but not very helpful to the users.
Show 5 quoted lines
>> where remote tracking information is >> incomplete if you only look at heads and refs, in the sense that we >> no longer suggest ineffective workaround. > > s/ineffective/an effective/ ?
Even though I make many typoes, I meant ineffective in this case. "The old message suggested workaround that would not help. You no longer give that workaround that does not work."
Show 12 quoted lines
>> If that is the case, perhaps configuring push.recurseSubmodules to >> turn this off (especially because you plan to turn the defaul to >> "check") and not giving the command line option would give a more >> pleasant end-user experience, I suspect. > > I though about going another way and adding another new value > to the enum, such that > > git push --recurse-submodules=sameRefSpecButNoCheck \ > origin HEAD:refs/for/master > > works for Gerrit users.
It is unclear what that enum tells Git to do. Care to explain? How is it different from "no"?