Deprecating refs/for namespace?

Nicholas Mucci

unread,

Dec 21, 2012, 12:48:42 PM12/21/12

to repo-d...@googlegroups.com

In the 2.3 release notes, its mentioned that the refs/for namespace should be deprecated. There's no other published discussion about this I can find, and current documentation for uploading talks about using refs/for. What should we do about this disagreement? After some initial discussion prior to writing this post, it seems that people continue to use refs/for out of habit, and no action has been taken to deprecate it in favor of refs/publish.

Should we move forward with deprecating the refs/for namespace? Or since it has been so ingrained in the Gerrit workflow we should leave it alone?

-Nick

Steffen Gebert

unread,

Dec 21, 2012, 1:00:52 PM12/21/12

to repo-d...@googlegroups.com

Hi Nick,

I don't know, how hard it is to keep it from the technical perspective, but as long it's not a PITA for Gerrit developers, I ask for keeping that.
Otherwise contributors have to be informed about that change, remember how it's called (imho refs/for/ is easier to remember than refs/publish), and also it's shorter to type.

Yours
steffen

> --
> To unsubscribe, email repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com
> More info at http://groups.google.com/group/repo-discuss?hl=en

Chad Horohoe

unread,

Dec 21, 2012, 1:12:12 PM12/21/12

to Repo and Gerrit Discussion

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Steffen Gebert <ste...@steffen-gebert.de> wrote:

Hi Nick,

I don't know, how hard it is to keep it from the technical perspective, but as long it's not a PITA for Gerrit developers, I ask for keeping that.
Otherwise contributors have to be informed about that change, remember how it's called (imho refs/for/ is easier to remember than refs/publish), and also it's shorter to type.

I'm very much in favor of deprecating the deprecation, and making refs/for/*

the canonical way again. It's muscle-memory for many many people, number

of characters aside.

-Chad

Shawn Pearce

unread,

Dec 21, 2012, 1:13:13 PM12/21/12

to Chad Horohoe, Repo and Gerrit Discussion

+1. I also want to keep refs/for/...

Since I am the one that proposed deprecating refs/for/... maybe its no
longer deprecated?

:-)

Patrick Renaud

unread,

Dec 21, 2012, 1:49:37 PM12/21/12

to Shawn Pearce, Chad Horohoe, Repo and Gerrit Discussion

+1, keep refs/for/...

--
To unsubscribe, email repo-discuss...@googlegroups.com
More info at http://groups.google.com/group/repo-discuss?hl=en

--
--Patrick

lucamilanesio

unread,

Dec 11, 2013, 3:26:31 AM12/11/13

to repo-d...@googlegroups.com, Shawn Pearce, Chad Horohoe

It is a "well known old topic" but I got people submitting ERRATA-CORRIGE to the Learning Gerrit Code Review book saying that I should not mention the refs/for/* ref-spec as it has been deprecated a long time ago.

Can we just re-state (re-confirm) that refs/for/* is what we like and we keep ? :-)

Luca.

Shawn Pearce

unread,

Dec 11, 2013, 3:41:21 AM12/11/13

to lucamilanesio, repo-discuss, Chad Horohoe

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:26 AM, lucamilanesio
<luca.mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is a "well known old topic" but I got people submitting ERRATA-CORRIGE to
> the Learning Gerrit Code Review book saying that I should not mention the
> refs/for/* ref-spec as it has been deprecated a long time ago.
>
> Can we just re-state (re-confirm) that refs/for/* is what we like and we
> keep ? :-)

Trying to deprecate refs/for/* was a mistake.

refs/for/* is here to stay.

Luca Milanesio

unread,

Dec 11, 2013, 3:54:04 AM12/11/13

to Shawn Pearce, repo-discuss, Chad Horohoe

Thanks for the feedback, much appreciated :-)

Luca.

Reply all

Reply to author

Forward