Create group if not exists when cloning repo #288

Rulrn · 2025-09-18T20:01:48Z

Resolves #260 & #271 + add cloning by branch

Create the group when using gita clone <repo> -g <group_name>.

Also, I have added the argument --path for the group path to the p_clone parser, but I don't understand what this group_path is used for. I have not found anything in the README, maybe adding some information on it could be useful ?

On cloning by branch

I have tried to implement it, but it may need some discussion on the implementation.

I have added the current branch of each repo when doing a gita freeze
When using gita clone -f <freeze_file> it does one of the following :
2a. If the option --no-branch is used, it does not try to clone by branch
2b. If the git version is prior to 1.7.10 and the option --force-branch is not used, it does not try to clone by branch, as the git option --single-branch is not yet available, and cloning by branch wil in fact clone every branch and may result in unwanted data fetching (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/1911126)
2c. If none of the above happens, it will clone by branch using the branch name in the freeze_file generated by gita freeze

nosarthur · 2025-09-19T04:20:53Z

thanks @Rulrn

the group path is used to automatically determine the current context (gita context)

when context is set as auto, the group can be deduced from current directory and the paths of all group paths:

cwd should be under the group path
the group with closest group path to cwd is the current group

nosarthur · 2025-09-19T05:15:13Z

gita/__main__.py

+            gpath = ""
+            if "gpath" in args:
+                gpath = args.gpath


gpath is not on p_add, thus it doesn't exist

p_add.add_argument("--group-path", dest="gpath", type=_path_name)

it seems this check should be on group_path, from line 237

Resolved in 0f0d82b

Is this the kind of check you expected ?

nosarthur · 2025-09-19T05:23:56Z

gita/__main__.py

            # TODO: add another field to distinguish regular repo or worktree or submodule
-            print(f"{url},{name},{path},")
+            branch = info.get_repo_branch(prop, info.Truncate())
+            print(f"{url},{name},{path},,,{branch}")


Because under io.py the function that reads the freeze results expects the following values :

["url", "name", "path", "type", "flags", "branch"]

If I omit those commas, the branch value ends up under the wrong field (type or flags)

I don't know what should be set for type and flags, maybe it is related to #271

we can leave them for the future

ideally, they should go into the freeze data too

For now, gita clone from a file does not add the repo to gita if there are no groups. If we want flags/type to be in freeze, then we should consider adding the repo to gita when cloning even if the repo was not in any groups, but it changes the current behavior.

I feel that it is an expected behavior, I expected gita to automatically add the repo to it's "database" when cloning with it, otherwise I would simply use git directly.

Should we make gita clone add the repo to gita the default ?

I agree, the repos should be added even if they are not in any groups

please feel free to leave that out of this PR since you have done quite a lot of work

Implemented in 76174e0

Repo are now automatically added to the config file, even when not part of a group.

I also added a check when cloning repo to avoid adding duplicates, I had to add the file_only option to get_repos to get repos in config even if the repository did not exist.

If we use gita clone -f <freeze_file> with multiple freeze_file, it merges repo in the same groups.

The information of type and flags are also added to the config, I omitted the branch one because I don't know if it is relevant to add it to the config for now. Maybe we can solve #285, but I think it might be trickier than just having a branch in the config file, thus I kept it blank for now.

Tests are failing for now, I wait your approval on current state before updating them.

thanks very much!

branch should be safe to ignore, their life span is variable and it may not exist at the gita clone time. it's easy to switch to anyways

one minor point: duplicates are handled in a subtle way before: it doesn't hurt to have 2 duplicate lines in the repos.csv, when any repo gets updates, the whole repo dictionary is saved to disk, then we have unique repos in the file

gita/__main__.py

Save type and flasg attribute when using gita freeze

…le freeze files

nosarthur · 2025-09-24T16:00:27Z

gita/__main__.py

-        path = Path.cwd()
+    path = args.directory or Path.cwd()

+    current_repos_path = [r["path"] for r in utils.get_repos(file_only=True).values()]


set instead of list?

also why do we need file_only here?

I have changed the list for a set.

The file_only is used to avoid adding duplicate in gita if the repo is already in the configuration. Before I added this argument, the get_repos function was always checking if the path exists before returning the repos (with the is_git function being called). But if for some reason, we added a repository to gita, removed it and cloned it back, gita do not find the path and therefore add it a second time (which is not so important as you said in a previous comment, gita removing duplicates automatically when updating repos).

The file_only just skip the check of path existing for the repository in the configuration.

I agree that this scenario it is a bit far-fetched, maybe it was not necessary to implement such a thing, but I still think it is better to have a clean configuration straight away if possible.

And now that I think about it, what is the reason behind checking if the repo's path exists in the get_repos function with git_url ?

And now that I think about it, what is the reason behind checking if the repo's path exists in the get_repos function with git_url

It's just a sanity check. repos.csv is a snapshot and its information could be invalid when gita command is triggered

Sorry I am still not sure why file_only is needed

But if for some reason, we added a repository to gita, removed it and cloned it back, gita do not find the path and therefore add it a second time

If a repo is removed from gita, then gets added back from gita clone -f xxx, why is it added twice? It seems there is only 1 line corresponding to this repo in repos.csv: the original line is removed with the gita rm command

Sorry, I should have precised "removed without using gita", like "rm -r xxx"

i see, thanks

i would suggest a name change: skip_validation instead of file_only so that the intention is more clear

I agree, changed in 854d54d

gita/__main__.py

… file

gita/__main__.py

nosarthur · 2025-09-29T01:43:12Z

would you be able to fix the unit tests? if not, i can take care of that later

https://github.com/nosarthur/gita/actions/runs/18063927896/job/51449594122?pr=288

Rulrn · 2025-09-29T10:01:46Z

Tests fixed in 61c5f4c

Rulrn added 5 commits September 18, 2025 21:53

Create group if not exists when cloning repo

34aae79

Add repo git gita when cloning from file

72021c0

remove todo

7934cc6

Adding cloning by branch if git version is > 1.7.10

a3ee614

Adding a --force-branch when cloning

72b6f04

nosarthur reviewed Sep 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

Rulrn marked this pull request as draft September 19, 2025 08:11

Check gpath under clone + delete useless line

0f0d82b

Rulrn marked this pull request as ready for review September 19, 2025 15:28

nosarthur reviewed Sep 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

gita/__main__.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Rulrn added 3 commits September 20, 2025 01:12

Use prop for gpath in f_clone + add group-path to f_add

0164aab

Add option to get_repos to parse config without checking if repos exists

ef0f67e

Check if repo is already in gita before adding it

bd09926

Save type and flasg attribute when using gita freeze

nosarthur approved these changes Sep 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

Rulrn added 2 commits September 20, 2025 15:21

fix get repo with new file_only option

43e6dbd

Add repo to gita when cloning + merge groups when cloning from multip…

76174e0

…le freeze files

nosarthur reviewed Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

gita/__main__.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Rulrn added 3 commits September 24, 2025 20:41

rename (repos|groups)_to_clone

894ab36

use set insted of list for list of current repository paths in config…

3200fbb

… file

rename file_only -> skip_validation

854d54d

nosarthur reviewed Sep 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

gita/__main__.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

update file_only

b3b6cbe

update tests

61c5f4c

Rulrn closed this Sep 29, 2025

Rulrn reopened this Sep 29, 2025

nosarthur merged commit f48e7d4 into nosarthur:master Sep 29, 2025
9 of 18 checks passed

Rulrn deleted the clone_create_group branch October 18, 2025 12:39

Rulrn mentioned this pull request Oct 18, 2025

Git default branch cloning handling #295

Open

Uh oh!

Create group if not exists when cloning repo #288

Create group if not exists when cloning repo #288

Uh oh!

Conversation

Rulrn commented Sep 18, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Resolves #260 & #271 + add cloning by branch

On cloning by branch

Uh oh!

nosarthur commented Sep 19, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Rulrn Sep 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nosarthur Sep 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nosarthur commented Sep 29, 2025

Uh oh!

Rulrn commented Sep 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Rulrn commented Sep 18, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Rulrn Sep 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading

nosarthur Sep 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Rulrn commented Sep 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading