Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] fetch --prune: prune only based on explicit refspecs

From: Michael Haggerty <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 08:49:12 +0200

On 10/24/2013 11:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
>> ...
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <[email-masked]>
> 
> Everything in the proposed log message made sense to me.
> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
>> index d4d93c9..83c1700 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/config.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/config.txt
>> @@ -2086,7 +2086,7 @@ remote.<name>.vcs::
>>  remote.<name>.prune::
>>  	When set to true, fetching from this remote by default will also
>>  	remove any remote-tracking branches which no longer exist on the
>> -	remote (as if the `--prune` option was give on the command line).
>> +	remote (as if the `--prune` option was given on the command line).
> 
> Shouldn't we stop saying "branches" here?
> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/fetch-options.txt b/Documentation/fetch-options.txt
>> index 0e6d2ac..5d12219 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/fetch-options.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/fetch-options.txt
>> @@ -41,8 +41,14 @@ ifndef::git-pull[]
>>  
>>  -p::
>>  --prune::
>> -	After fetching, remove any remote-tracking branches which
>> -	no longer exist	on the remote.
>> +	After fetching, remove any remote-tracking branches that
> 
> Likewise.  This is a lot more important than the one in
> remote.<name>.prune documentation, as the next sentence "Tags are
> not subject to ..." implies that they fall into the same category as
> what gets pruned here, i.e. "remote-tracking branches" in the above
> sentence, but nobody calls refs/tags/v1.0.0 a "remote-tracking
> branch" even if it came from your 'origin'.

OK, I will change both of the above from "remote-tracking branches" to
"remote-tracking references".

>> +	no longer exist	on the remote.  Tags are not subject to
>> +	pruning in the usual case that they are fetched because of the
>> +	--tags option or remote.<name>.tagopt.  
> 
> We should mention the most usual case tags are fetched, before
> mentioning the case the unusual option "--tags" was used from the
> command line or .tagopt configuration was used.  Namely, when the
> tags are automatically followed.

OK, I will change this in the next draft.

>> @@ -63,7 +69,10 @@ ifndef::git-pull[]
>>  --tags::
>>  	This is a short-hand requesting that all tags be fetched from
>>  	the remote in addition to whatever else is being fetched.  It
>> -	is similar to using the refspec `refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*`.
>> +	is similar to using the refspec `refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*`,
>> +	except that it doesn't subject tags to pruning, regardless of
>> +	a --prune option or the configuration settings of fetch.prune
>> +	or remote.<name>.prune.
> 
> Using --tags is not similar to using refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* after
> the previous patch already; "git fetch origin --tags" and "git fetch
> origin refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*" are vastly different and that was
> the whole point of the previous step.  And that "calling something
> not so similar similar" needs to be fixed further here to clarify
> that they are not similar in yet another way.
> 
> We should just lose "It is similar to using" from 10/15 and start
> over, perhaps?  Add the first paragraph of the below in 10/15 and
> add the rest in 11/15, or something.
> 
> 	--tags::
> 		Request that all tags be fetched from the remote
> 		under the same name (i.e. `refs/tags/X` is created in
> 		our repository by copying their `refs/tags/X`), in
> 		addition to whatever is fetched by the same `git
> 		fetch` command without this option on the command
> 		line.
> 	+
>         When `refs/tags/*` hierarchy from the remote is copied only
>         because this option was given, they are not subject to be
> 	pruned when `--prune` option (or configuration variables
> 	like `fetch.prune` or `remote.<name>.prune`) is in effect.
> 
> That would make it clear that they are subject to pruning when --mirror
> or an explicit refspec refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* is given, as tags are
> not fetched "only because of --tags" in such cases.

I see your point.  What do you think about the following version, which
is a bit more compact and refers the reader to --prune for the full story:

-t::
--tags::
	Fetch all tags from the remote (i.e., fetch remote tags
	`refs/tags/*` into local tags with the same name), in addition
	to whatever else would otherwise be fetched.  Using this
	option does not subject tags to pruning, even if --prune is
	used (though tags may be pruned anyway if they are also the
	destination of an explicit refspec; see '--prune').

I also want to improve the description of tag auto-following in general.
 I will send a re-rolled patch series in the next couple of days.

Thanks for your prompt and helpful advice!

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
[email-masked]
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/