From: Jeff King <peff@peff•net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] remote.c: drop "remote" pointer from "struct branch"
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 18:24:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150331222431.GB31948@peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqvbhgq4ci.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 01:50:05PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Getting rid of it drops one potential source of confusion:
> > is the value the match for "remote_name", or is it the
> > remote we would fetch from when on that branch (i.e., does
> > it fall back to "origin")?
>
> I had to read the above three times before I realized that you were
> wondering "what is the value of this 'remote' field? is it what
> remote_get() would give us for 'remote_name' and is NULL if
> remote_name is not set, or is it never NULL and instead have the
> remote for 'origin' if remote_name is not set?"
>
> But perhaps it is just me.
>
> We certainly have duplicated information between the two fields, and
> it first looked somewhat unnatural that you kept the name with which
> you need to trigger a search for the structure, instead of keeping
> the structure, one of whose field is its name already. Perhaps
> there was a valid reason behind this choice, and I am guessing that
> it is probably because it will not let you differenciate the case
> where the user explicitly said 'origin' and we used 'origin' as a
> fallback, if you keep a "remote" field that stores the instance of
> the remote structure for 'origin' without keeping "remote_name".
That is the reason I was trying to explain above. Though I suppose you
could argue that remote_name suffers the same question (i.e., would we
ever set it to "origin"?)
It is much worse for pushremotes, which can come from
branch.*.pushremote, remote.pushdefault, branch.*.remote, or "origin".
I'll try to re-word the commit message.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-31 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-31 17:33 [PATCH 0/6] implement @{push} shorthand Jeff King
2015-03-31 17:34 ` [PATCH 1/6] remote.c: drop default_remote_name variable Jeff King
2015-03-31 20:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 22:22 ` Jeff King
2015-03-31 17:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] remote.c: drop "remote" pointer from "struct branch" Jeff King
2015-03-31 20:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 22:24 ` Jeff King [this message]
2015-03-31 22:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 17:36 ` [PATCH 3/6] remote.c: hoist branch.*.remote lookup out of remote_get_1 Jeff King
2015-03-31 17:37 ` [PATCH 4/6] remote.c: provide per-branch pushremote name Jeff King
2015-03-31 21:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 17:37 ` [PATCH 5/6] sha1_name: refactor upstream_mark Jeff King
2015-03-31 17:38 ` [PATCH 6/6] sha1_name: implement @{push} shorthand Jeff King
2015-03-31 21:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 22:32 ` Jeff King
2015-03-31 22:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2015-03-31 21:41 ` Eric Sunshine
2015-03-31 22:33 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150331222431.GB31948@peff.net \
--to=peff@peff$(echo .)net \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox