| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
In the verison negotiation phase between "receive-pack" and
"proc-receive", "proc-receive" can send an empty flush-pkt to end the
negotiation and use default version 0. Capabilities (such as
"push-options") are not supported in version 0.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Johannes found a flaky hang in `t5411/test-0013-bad-protocol.sh` in the
osx-clang job of the CI/PR builds, and ran into an issue when using
the `--stress` option with the following error messages:
fatal: unable to write flush packet: Broken pipe
send-pack: unexpected disconnect while reading sideband packet
fatal: the remote end hung up unexpectedly
In this test case, the "proc-receive" hook sends an error message and
dies earlier. While "receive-pack" on the other side of the pipe
should forward the error message of the "proc-receive" hook to the
client side, but it fails to do so. This is because "receive-pack"
uses `packet_write_fmt()` and `packet_flush()` to write pkt-line
message to "proc-receive" hook, and these functions die immediately
when pipe is broken. Using "gently" forms for these functions will get
more predicable output.
Add more "--die-*" options to test helper to test different stages of
the protocol between "receive-pack" and "proc-receive" hook.
Reported-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Suggested-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
New helper `filter_out_user_friendly_and_stable_output` will call
common helpr function `make_user_friendly_and_stable_output` and use
additional arguments to filter out messages for specific test cases.
Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
In addition to the trivial search-and-replace performed over the course
of the previous three commits, there is one test in t5411 that depends
on the length of the default branch name.
Adjust it and use `main` as the default branch name in this test.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
This trick was performed via
$ sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \
-e 's/Master/Main/g' -- t/t5411/*
In the previous commit, we adjusted roughly half of the support files,
to stay under the 100kB limit (mails larger than that are rejected by
the Git mailing list).
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
This trick was performed via
$ sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \
-e 's/Master/Main/g' -- t/t5411/test-00[3-5]*
We do not convert the files in `t/t5411/` in one go because the patch
would be too big (mails larger than 100kB are rejected by the Git
mailing list). Instead, we start with roughly half of the support files.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
When pushing a pseudo reference (such as "refs/for/master/topic"), may
create or update one or more references. The real names of the
references will be stored in the report options. Parse report options
to create or update remote-tracking branches properly.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
In order to test update of remote-tracking branches for special refs,
add new "remote.origin.fetch" settings and test cases.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Add a new multi-valued config variable "receive.procReceiveRefs"
for `receive-pack` command, like the follows:
git config --system --add receive.procReceiveRefs refs/for
git config --system --add receive.procReceiveRefs refs/drafts
If the specific prefix strings given by the config variables match the
reference names of the commands which are sent from git client to
`receive-pack`, these commands will be executed by an external hook
(named "proc-receive"), instead of the internal `execute_commands`
function.
For example, if it is set to "refs/for", pushing to a reference such as
"refs/for/master" will not create or update reference "refs/for/master",
but may create or update a pull request directly by running the hook
"proc-receive".
Optional modifiers can be provided in the beginning of the value to
filter commands for specific actions: create (a), modify (m),
delete (d). A `!` can be included in the modifiers to negate the
reference prefix entry. E.g.:
git config --system --add receive.procReceiveRefs ad:refs/heads
git config --system --add receive.procReceiveRefs !:refs/heads
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
The new introduced "proc-receive" hook may handle a command for a
pseudo-reference with a zero-old as its old-oid, while the hook may
create or update a reference with different name, different new-oid,
and different old-oid (the reference may exist already with a non-zero
old-oid). Current "report-status" protocol cannot report the status for
such reference rewrite.
Add new capability "report-status-v2" and new report protocol which is
not backward compatible for report of git-push.
If a user pushes to a pseudo-reference "refs/for/master/topic", and
"receive-pack" creates two new references "refs/changes/23/123/1" and
"refs/changes/24/124/1", for client without the knowledge of
"report-status-v2", "receive-pack" will only send "ok/ng" directives in
the report, such as:
ok ref/for/master/topic
But for client which has the knowledge of "report-status-v2",
"receive-pack" will use "option" directives to report more attributes
for the reference given by the above "ok/ng" directive.
ok refs/for/master/topic
option refname refs/changes/23/123/1
option new-oid <new-oid>
ok refs/for/master/topic
option refname refs/changes/24/124/1
option new-oid <new-oid>
The client will report two new created references to the end user.
Suggested-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Suggested-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
When commands are fed to the "post-receive" hook, report options will
be parsed and the real old-oid, new-oid, reference name will feed to
the "post-receive" hook.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Git calls an internal `execute_commands` function to handle commands
sent from client to `git-receive-pack`. Regardless of what references
the user pushes, git creates or updates the corresponding references if
the user has write-permission. A contributor who has no
write-permission, cannot push to the repository directly. So, the
contributor has to write commits to an alternate location, and sends
pull request by emails or by other ways. We call this workflow as a
distributed workflow.
It would be more convenient to work in a centralized workflow like what
Gerrit provided for some cases. For example, a read-only user who
cannot push to a branch directly can run the following `git push`
command to push commits to a pseudo reference (has a prefix "refs/for/",
not "refs/heads/") to create a code review.
git push origin \
HEAD:refs/for/<branch-name>/<session>
The `<branch-name>` in the above example can be as simple as "master",
or a more complicated branch name like "foo/bar". The `<session>` in
the above example command can be the local branch name of the client
side, such as "my/topic".
We cannot implement a centralized workflow elegantly by using
"pre-receive" + "post-receive", because Git will call the internal
function "execute_commands" to create references (even the special
pseudo reference) between these two hooks. Even though we can delete
the temporarily created pseudo reference via the "post-receive" hook,
having a temporary reference is not safe for concurrent pushes.
So, add a filter and a new handler to support this kind of workflow.
The filter will check the prefix of the reference name, and if the
command has a special reference name, the filter will turn a specific
field (`run_proc_receive`) on for the command. Commands with this filed
turned on will be executed by a new handler (a hook named
"proc-receive") instead of the internal `execute_commands` function.
We can use this "proc-receive" command to create pull requests or send
emails for code review.
Suggested by Junio, this "proc-receive" hook reads the commands,
push-options (optional), and send result using a protocol in pkt-line
format. In the following example, the letter "S" stands for
"receive-pack" and letter "H" stands for the hook.
# Version and features negotiation.
S: PKT-LINE(version=1\0push-options atomic...)
S: flush-pkt
H: PKT-LINE(version=1\0push-options...)
H: flush-pkt
# Send commands from server to the hook.
S: PKT-LINE(<old-oid> <new-oid> <ref>)
S: ... ...
S: flush-pkt
# Send push-options only if the 'push-options' feature is enabled.
S: PKT-LINE(push-option)
S: ... ...
S: flush-pkt
# Receive result from the hook.
# OK, run this command successfully.
H: PKT-LINE(ok <ref>)
# NO, I reject it.
H: PKT-LINE(ng <ref> <reason>)
# Fall through, let 'receive-pack' to execute it.
H: PKT-LINE(ok <ref>)
H: PKT-LINE(option fall-through)
# OK, but has an alternate reference. The alternate reference name
# and other status can be given in options
H: PKT-LINE(ok <ref>)
H: PKT-LINE(option refname <refname>)
H: PKT-LINE(option old-oid <old-oid>)
H: PKT-LINE(option new-oid <new-oid>)
H: PKT-LINE(option forced-update)
H: ... ...
H: flush-pkt
After receiving a command, the hook will execute the command, and may
create/update different reference. For example, a command for a pseudo
reference "refs/for/master/topic" may create/update different reference
such as "refs/pull/123/head". The alternate reference name and other
status are given in option lines.
The list of commands returned from "proc-receive" will replace the
relevant commands that are sent from user to "receive-pack", and
"receive-pack" will continue to run the "execute_commands" function and
other routines. Finally, the result of the execution of these commands
will be reported to end user.
The reporting function from "receive-pack" to "send-pack" will be
extended in latter commit just like what the "proc-receive" hook reports
to "receive-pack".
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Topic "proc-receive-hook" will change the workflow and output of
git-push. Add some basic test cases in t5411 before introducing the new
topic.
Signed-off-by: Jiang Xin <zhiyou.jx@alibaba-inc.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
Jiang Xin
Johannes Schindelin
Jiang Xin