|
355
|
1 #!/bin/sh
|
|
|
2 #
|
|
|
3 # Copyright (c) 2006 Junio C Hamano
|
|
|
4 #
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
6 publish=next
|
|
|
7 basebranch="$1"
|
|
|
8 if test "$#" = 2
|
|
|
9 then
|
|
|
10 topic="refs/heads/$2"
|
|
|
11 else
|
|
|
12 topic=`git symbolic-ref HEAD`
|
|
|
13 fi
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
15 case "$basebranch,$topic" in
|
|
|
16 master,refs/heads/??/*)
|
|
|
17 ;;
|
|
|
18 *)
|
|
|
19 exit 0 ;# we do not interrupt others.
|
|
|
20 ;;
|
|
|
21 esac
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
23 # Now we are dealing with a topic branch being rebased
|
|
|
24 # on top of master. Is it OK to rebase it?
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
26 # Is topic fully merged to master?
|
|
|
27 not_in_master=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^master "$topic"`
|
|
|
28 if test -z "$not_in_master"
|
|
|
29 then
|
|
|
30 echo >&2 "$topic is fully merged to master; better remove it."
|
|
|
31 exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point.
|
|
|
32 fi
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
34 # Is topic ever merged to next? If so you should not be rebasing it.
|
|
|
35 only_next_1=`git-rev-list ^master "^$topic" ${publish} | sort`
|
|
|
36 only_next_2=`git-rev-list ^master ${publish} | sort`
|
|
|
37 if test "$only_next_1" = "$only_next_2"
|
|
|
38 then
|
|
|
39 not_in_topic=`git-rev-list "^$topic" master`
|
|
|
40 if test -z "$not_in_topic"
|
|
|
41 then
|
|
|
42 echo >&2 "$topic is already up-to-date with master"
|
|
|
43 exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point.
|
|
|
44 else
|
|
|
45 exit 0
|
|
|
46 fi
|
|
|
47 else
|
|
|
48 not_in_next=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^${publish} "$topic"`
|
|
|
49 perl -e '
|
|
|
50 my $topic = $ARGV[0];
|
|
|
51 my $msg = "* $topic has commits already merged to public branch:\n";
|
|
|
52 my (%not_in_next) = map {
|
|
|
53 /^([0-9a-f]+) /;
|
|
|
54 ($1 => 1);
|
|
|
55 } split(/\n/, $ARGV[1]);
|
|
|
56 for my $elem (map {
|
|
|
57 /^([0-9a-f]+) (.*)$/;
|
|
|
58 [$1 => $2];
|
|
|
59 } split(/\n/, $ARGV[2])) {
|
|
|
60 if (!exists $not_in_next{$elem->[0]}) {
|
|
|
61 if ($msg) {
|
|
|
62 print STDERR $msg;
|
|
|
63 undef $msg;
|
|
|
64 }
|
|
|
65 print STDERR " $elem->[1]\n";
|
|
|
66 }
|
|
|
67 }
|
|
|
68 ' "$topic" "$not_in_next" "$not_in_master"
|
|
|
69 exit 1
|
|
|
70 fi
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
72 exit 0
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
74 ################################################################
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
76 This sample hook safeguards topic branches that have been
|
|
|
77 published from being rewound.
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
79 The workflow assumed here is:
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
81 * Once a topic branch forks from "master", "master" is never
|
|
|
82 merged into it again (either directly or indirectly).
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
84 * Once a topic branch is fully cooked and merged into "master",
|
|
|
85 it is deleted. If you need to build on top of it to correct
|
|
|
86 earlier mistakes, a new topic branch is created by forking at
|
|
|
87 the tip of the "master". This is not strictly necessary, but
|
|
|
88 it makes it easier to keep your history simple.
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
90 * Whenever you need to test or publish your changes to topic
|
|
|
91 branches, merge them into "next" branch.
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
93 The script, being an example, hardcodes the publish branch name
|
|
|
94 to be "next", but it is trivial to make it configurable via
|
|
|
95 $GIT_DIR/config mechanism.
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
97 With this workflow, you would want to know:
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
99 (1) ... if a topic branch has ever been merged to "next". Young
|
|
|
100 topic branches can have stupid mistakes you would rather
|
|
|
101 clean up before publishing, and things that have not been
|
|
|
102 merged into other branches can be easily rebased without
|
|
|
103 affecting other people. But once it is published, you would
|
|
|
104 not want to rewind it.
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
106 (2) ... if a topic branch has been fully merged to "master".
|
|
|
107 Then you can delete it. More importantly, you should not
|
|
|
108 build on top of it -- other people may already want to
|
|
|
109 change things related to the topic as patches against your
|
|
|
110 "master", so if you need further changes, it is better to
|
|
|
111 fork the topic (perhaps with the same name) afresh from the
|
|
|
112 tip of "master".
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
114 Let's look at this example:
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
116 o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "next"
|
|
|
117 / / / /
|
|
|
118 / a---a---b A / /
|
|
|
119 / / / /
|
|
|
120 / / c---c---c---c B /
|
|
|
121 / / / \ /
|
|
|
122 / / / b---b C \ /
|
|
|
123 / / / / \ /
|
|
|
124 ---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "master"
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
127 A, B and C are topic branches.
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
129 * A has one fix since it was merged up to "next".
|
|
|
130
|
|
|
131 * B has finished. It has been fully merged up to "master" and "next",
|
|
|
132 and is ready to be deleted.
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
134 * C has not merged to "next" at all.
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
136 We would want to allow C to be rebased, refuse A, and encourage
|
|
|
137 B to be deleted.
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
139 To compute (1):
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
141 git-rev-list ^master ^topic next
|
|
|
142 git-rev-list ^master next
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
144 if these match, topic has not merged in next at all.
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
146 To compute (2):
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
148 git-rev-list master..topic
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
150 if this is empty, it is fully merged to "master".
|
