From: Mark Jamsek <mark@jamsek.com>
Subject: Re: improve got fetch error reporting
To: gameoftrees@openbsd.org
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 15:09:08 +1100

On 23-02-05 11:12PM, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2023 at 05:34:11PM +1100, Mark Jamsek wrote:
> > On the topic of got's new fetch behaviour, do you think it would be a
> > good idea to fallback to the branch resolved by the remote's HEAD ref
> > if 'got fetch' is run in a work tree without -b?
> > 
> > So, 'got fetch' will first attempt to fetch the work tree's current
> > branch, but if not found it will fetch the remote repository's HEAD.
> 
> Yes, I think that is indeed better than just erroring out.
> Below is a new patch which includes your suggestion.
> 
> However, while working on this I realized that our assumptions about
> the intended default behaviour have been wrong. Please check the log
> message and diff below. This now seems a lot more consistent to me.
> 
> -----------------------------------------------
>  
>  improve 'got fetch' behaviour when work tree's branch is not on server
>  
>  Only fetch the work tree's branch if the -b option is not specified.
>  This keeps -b functional as an override when invoked in a work tree.
>  
>  Our previous changes did not consider that got.conf is also a source
>  of lists of branches to fetch, and that -b is supposed to work as an
>  override of any default behaviour. We were implicitly appending the
>  work tree's branch as if it was mentioned as an override on the
>  command line, which was wrong and based on a misunderstanding of
>  the intended behaviour.
>  
>  Without -b on the command line we obtain a list of branches to fetch
>  from got.conf and use this list if it is not empty. The repository's
>  HEAD will be fetched only if neither the -b option, nor got.conf, nor
>  a work tree tell us what to fetch.
>  
>  Make the man page more clear by moving the explanation of the default
>  behaviour into the main section of 'got fetch', leaving the -a and -b
>  option descriptions free of such details.

Yes, I like this much better! I was a little concerned by erroring out
if fetching from a worktree with a checked-out branch that doesn't exist
on the server. I prefer this behaviour. Thank you for unwrapping this :)

ok

-- 
Mark Jamsek <fnc.bsdbox.org>
GPG: F2FF 13DE 6A06 C471 CA80  E6E2 2930 DC66 86EE CF68