Re: [PATCH 1/2] Modify pseudo refs through ref backend storage

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 7, 2020, 15:20 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqv9iz5p2v.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFQ2z_OPbcX9FGsFnmraAUpTu2eKuf2PZ+DO-CTWvaBZD6WQQQ@mail.gmail.com>

Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com> writes:

>> Or the entities that behave like refs and stored in ref backends,
>> with all-uppercase-names but do not sit inside refs/ hierarchy?
>
> I thought these were the same? - see below :)

Show 14 quoted lines

>> > --- a/t/t1400-update-ref.sh
>> > +++ b/t/t1400-update-ref.sh
>> > @@ -476,7 +476,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git cat-file blob master@{2005-05-26 23:42}:F (expect OTHER
>> >  test_expect_success 'given old value for missing pseudoref, do not create' '
>> >       test_must_fail git update-ref PSEUDOREF $A $B 2>err &&
>> >       test_path_is_missing .git/PSEUDOREF &&
>>
>> The reason why I asked what this patch thinks the definition of
>> pseudoref is is because of this thing.  Shouldn't this line be fixed
>> not to depend on the files backend?  Likewise for $(cat .git/PSEUDOREF)
>> in the remaining two hunks.
>
> This patch doesn't introduce reftable yet, so both definitions are
> equivalent for the sake of this patch.

But at the end of the tunnel, we do want to see people stop expecting that .git/PSEUDOREF file is what PSEUDOREF ref is, no? I think that is what "pseudo refs are not just files directly under $GIT_DIR, but managed by the backend" means, and that in turn is a valid justification for other changes introduced in this patch. Expecting the effect of modifying pseudo refs _after_ the code is changed that such modifications are properly done through the ref API to appear on the filesystem feels like it goes against the reason why we are making this change, compared to checking to see if the pseudoref really got updated as desired via the ref API, at least to me.