| #!/bin/sh |
| # |
| # Copyright (c) 2006 Junio C Hamano |
| # |
| |
| publish=next |
| basebranch="$1" |
| if test "$#" = 2 |
| then |
| topic="refs/heads/$2" |
| else |
| topic=`git symbolic-ref HEAD` |
| fi |
| |
| case "$basebranch,$topic" in |
| master,refs/heads/??/*) |
| ;; |
| *) |
| exit 0 ;# we do not interrupt others. |
| ;; |
| esac |
| |
| # Now we are dealing with a topic branch being rebased |
| # on top of master. Is it OK to rebase it? |
| |
| # Is topic fully merged to master? |
| not_in_master=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^master "$topic"` |
| if test -z "$not_in_master" |
| then |
| echo >&2 "$topic is fully merged to master; better remove it." |
| exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point. |
| fi |
| |
| # Is topic ever merged to next? If so you should not be rebasing it. |
| only_next_1=`git-rev-list ^master "^$topic" ${publish} | sort` |
| only_next_2=`git-rev-list ^master ${publish} | sort` |
| if test "$only_next_1" = "$only_next_2" |
| then |
| not_in_topic=`git-rev-list "^$topic" master` |
| if test -z "$not_in_topic" |
| then |
| echo >&2 "$topic is already up-to-date with master" |
| exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point. |
| else |
| exit 0 |
| fi |
| else |
| not_in_next=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^${publish} "$topic"` |
| perl -e ' |
| my $topic = $ARGV[0]; |
| my $msg = "* $topic has commits already merged to public branch:\n"; |
| my (%not_in_next) = map { |
| /^([0-9a-f]+) /; |
| ($1 => 1); |
| } split(/\n/, $ARGV[1]); |
| for my $elem (map { |
| /^([0-9a-f]+) (.*)$/; |
| [$1 => $2]; |
| } split(/\n/, $ARGV[2])) { |
| if (!exists $not_in_next{$elem->[0]}) { |
| if ($msg) { |
| print STDERR $msg; |
| undef $msg; |
| } |
| print STDERR " $elem->[1]\n"; |
| } |
| } |
| ' "$topic" "$not_in_next" "$not_in_master" |
| exit 1 |
| fi |
| |
| exit 0 |
| |
| ################################################################ |
| |
| This sample hook safeguards topic branches that have been |
| published from being rewound. |
| |
| The workflow assumed here is: |
| |
| * Once a topic branch forks from "master", "master" is never |
| merged into it again (either directly or indirectly). |
| |
| * Once a topic branch is fully cooked and merged into "master", |
| it is deleted. If you need to build on top of it to correct |
| earlier mistakes, a new topic branch is created by forking at |
| the tip of the "master". This is not strictly necessary, but |
| it makes it easier to keep your history simple. |
| |
| * Whenever you need to test or publish your changes to topic |
| branches, merge them into "next" branch. |
| |
| The script, being an example, hardcodes the publish branch name |
| to be "next", but it is trivial to make it configurable via |
| $GIT_DIR/config mechanism. |
| |
| With this workflow, you would want to know: |
| |
| (1) ... if a topic branch has ever been merged to "next". Young |
| topic branches can have stupid mistakes you would rather |
| clean up before publishing, and things that have not been |
| merged into other branches can be easily rebased without |
| affecting other people. But once it is published, you would |
| not want to rewind it. |
| |
| (2) ... if a topic branch has been fully merged to "master". |
| Then you can delete it. More importantly, you should not |
| build on top of it -- other people may already want to |
| change things related to the topic as patches against your |
| "master", so if you need further changes, it is better to |
| fork the topic (perhaps with the same name) afresh from the |
| tip of "master". |
| |
| Let's look at this example: |
| |
| o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "next" |
| / / / / |
| / a---a---b A / / |
| / / / / |
| / / c---c---c---c B / |
| / / / \ / |
| / / / b---b C \ / |
| / / / / \ / |
| ---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "master" |
| |
| |
| A, B and C are topic branches. |
| |
| * A has one fix since it was merged up to "next". |
| |
| * B has finished. It has been fully merged up to "master" and "next", |
| and is ready to be deleted. |
| |
| * C has not merged to "next" at all. |
| |
| We would want to allow C to be rebased, refuse A, and encourage |
| B to be deleted. |
| |
| To compute (1): |
| |
| git-rev-list ^master ^topic next |
| git-rev-list ^master next |
| |
| if these match, topic has not merged in next at all. |
| |
| To compute (2): |
| |
| git-rev-list master..topic |
| |
| if this is empty, it is fully merged to "master". |