dulwich-users team mailing list archive

[Mark Mikofski <bwanamarko@xxxxxxxxx>]

>>>  Here is the push code:

>>> 
>>>      from dulwich.repo import Repo
>>>      from dulwich.client import get_transport_and_path
>>>      from getopt import getopt
>>>      import sys
>>> 
>>> 
>>>      def push(args):
>>>          opts, args = getopt(args, "", [])
>>>          opts = dict(opts)
>>>          client, path = get_transport_and_path(args.pop(0))
>>>          r = Repo(".")
>>>          objsto = r.object_store
>>>          refs = client.send_pack(path,
>>>                                  objsto.determine_wants_all,
>>>                                  objsto.generate_pack_contents,
>>>                                  sys.stdout.write)
>>> 
>>>  and the traceback pushing to github over SSH
>>>  (git@xxxxxxxxxx:mikofski/dulwichPorcelain) reads something like
>>>  this ...
>>> 
>>>  in client.py at line 289:
>>>      for refname in set(new_refs.keys() + old_refs.keys()):
>>>      'List' has no attribute 'keys'
>>>  from client.py at line 450-451:
>>>      (have, want) = self._handle_receive_pack_head(proto,
>>>          negotiated_capabilities, old_refs, new_refs)
>>>  from dulwich_push at line 16:
>>>      progress=sys.stdout.write
>>>  from stdin at line 1
>>>      push(['git@xxxxxxxxxx:mikofski/dulwichPorcelain'])
>>> 


>> So when I use send_pack, I use determine_wants_all from repo.object_

>> store, which is returning an empty list, but it should be a dictionary
>> of {refs:shas}. When _handle_receive_pack_head is called it tries to get
>> the keys and bam, AttributeError.
>> 
>> But I have 4 refs/shas in .git/objects by using bin/dulwich commit?

> So, the signature for determine_wants is different for send_pack and
> receive_pack. determine_wants_all is meant to be used with the pack
> receiver.

>
> We should really rename the determine_wants argument for send_pack to
> avoid this confusion.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> jelmer
>


Hi Jelmer,
So what is supposed to be used with send_pack? Should I modify or write
my own determine_wants_all for send_pack that returns the dictionary as
requested?
Is new_refs *all* of the refs in objects? or is it only the ones that are not
_old_?
For example, I have 4 ref:shas in objects. One commit is already on the
remote, because it was there when I cloned it. So I assume that's old_ref.
Now is new_refs the 3 remaining refs in objects, not including the one
already on the remote? I really need to learn a lot more about git plumbing!
Thanks!
--Mark