Re: Creation of a branch named that has a directory prefix equal to the name of another branch fail.

From: Bryan Turner <bturner@atlassian.com>
To: Tommaso Ercole <Tommaso.Ercole@qlik.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
	Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>,
	"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Creation of a branch named that has a directory prefix equal to the name of another branch fail.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 02:30:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGyf7-E6uyBnDZ7Uaz9awbUzgfPCabYeRNcYbw+yaHXDiLPdxw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR1801MB20765394FC05BA6830475B7CF0720@DM5PR1801MB2076.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 1:21 AM Tommaso Ercole <Tommaso.Ercole@qlik.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all and thanks for the answers.
>
> By my understanding it seems that you are aware of all the problems and you have just in place a solution for the future.
>
> I will just wait for it.
>
> Thank you really much for your effort, best regards,
> Tommaso Ercole
>
> P.S. btw this chat is it private between us or published somewhere, I just thought about it now, when I saw my phone number on my signature...

It's a public list, which anyone can register for, and it also has
multiple archives, like:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/DM5PR1801MB20762477763E6298C7FE6315F0770@DM5PR1801MB2076.namprd18.prod.outlook.com/

I don't think there's any way to scrub the data now. Even if it was
removed from lore.kernel.org as a one-off, the original email was
delivered to the entire list.

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Sent: venerdì 24 luglio 2020 22:44
> To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> Cc: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>; Tommaso Ercole <Tommaso.Ercole@qlik.com>; git@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: Creation of a branch named that has a directory prefix equal to the name of another branch fail.
>
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
> > Note that even though packed-refs does not have this limitation, we
> > still enforce it in order to avoid headaches when moving between loose
> > and packed refs.
> >
> > Likewise, we'll probably[1] continue to enforce it with reftables, at
> > least for a while, to make things less confusing when pushing and
> > pulling between repositories with different storage.
>
> Yup, that coincides with my understanding.
>
> The files backend could also learn encoding/decoding refnames and that could be used to transition, if/when we decide to discard the "refs are organized in a directory-tree like fashion" design we have been using, to a new world order where a branch M and branches M/A, M/B, and M/C can co-exist.  Encoding/decoding refname to map to the filename would also help those on case insensitive filesystems.
>
> Thanks to the recent preparation work for reftable, we are ensuring that we do not leave direct accesses to $GIT_DIR/refs/* in our codebase outside the files backend implementation, such a transition hopefully is getting much easier to do than before.