Re: Confusing git pull error message

[Nanako Shiraishi <nanako3@lavabit.com>]

Quoting Jeff King <peff@peff.net>

> On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 03:12:57PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> > I think you are right.
>> 
>> Nope, I'm not. I figured out one more case that it needs to handle.
>> Revised patch coming up in a few minutes.
>
> OK, here it is, which I think covers all of the cases. I also re-wrapped
> the text, as I agree with JSixt that it was pretty ugly. I also
> re-wrapped some of the existing text, as it gave the very choppy:
>
>   Your configuration specifies to merge the ref
>   'foo' from the remote, but no such ref
>   was fetched.
>
> It would be really nice to just pipe it through 'fmt', but I suspect
> that will create portability problems.
>
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] pull: improve advice for unconfigured error case
>
> There are several reasons a git-pull invocation might not
> have anything marked for merge:
>
>   1. We're not on a branch, so there is no branch
>      configuration.
>
>   2. We're on a branch, but there is no configuration for
>      this branch.
>
>   3. We fetched from the configured remote, but the
>      configured branch to merge didn't get fetched (either
>      it doesn't exist, or wasn't part of the fetch refspec).
>
>   4. We fetched from the non-default remote, but didn't
>      specify a branch to merge. We can't use the configured
>      one because it applies to the default remote.
>
>   5. We fetched from a specified remote, and a refspec was
>      given, but it ended up not fetching anything (this is
>      actually hard to do; if the refspec points to a remote
>      branch and it doesn't exist, then fetch will fail and
>      we never make it to this code path. But if you provide
>      a wildcard refspec like
>
>        refs/bogus/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
>
>      then you can see this failure).
>
> We have handled (1) and (2) for some time. Recently, commit
> a6dbf88 added code to handle case (3).
>
> This patch handles cases (4) and (5), which previously just
> fell under other cases, producing a confusing message.
>
> While we're at it, let's rewrap the text for case (3), which
> looks terribly ugly as it is.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> ---
>  git-pull.sh |   16 ++++++++++++----
>  1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Junio, may I ask what happened to this patch?