`fetch` no longer respects `prune = true` option on master

[davdroman]

When using lazygit from master, fetching doesn't respect the fetch.prune git option.

I suspect the recent major refactor has broken this feature.

[jesseduffield]

interesting. I'm taking a look at the differences in the Fetch method between pre-and-post refactor nothing jumps out at me. Is this a background fetch or a user-initiated one?

[davdroman]

It happens for user-initiated ones. I haven't tried background fetches since I usually have them disabled.

[jesseduffield]

I've written an integration test for this and in that test lazygit honours the git config: #1837

The shell script used to setup the situation is https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit/pull/1837/files#diff-821d132562bbf65075e9e5e4c09a26786239934ea653e5ce712aba22279031d3

So I'm not sure what's happening there 🤔 . If you pull that branch and run

go test ./pkg/gui -run /fetchPrune

does it fail for you?

[davdroman]

@jesseduffield it does. Is that expected?

[jesseduffield]

I think that test might be failing based on your global git config using 'main' by default. Is that right? The setup code in the tests all use 'master'

[davdroman]

Yup that's correct. All good ✅

[jesseduffield]

interesting. If that test passes it seems like lazygit is doing is indeed honouring fetch.prune in that case. I'm not sure what would be causing the issue on your end

[davdroman]

My fetch.prune is set globally, not per repository. Could that be making any difference?

[jesseduffield]

hmm good point. Would you be able to try turning it off globally and enabling it for your repo and seeing if that makes a difference?

[davdroman]

Hmm so global or local makes no difference.

However I just found that it works if I pull instead of fetch. It's rather weird because up until a week or two ago it was fetching that would prune gone branches, not pulling.

So I guess it's solved somewhat? 🤷😬

[jesseduffield]

Very strange. It really should be pruning gone branches via the fetch action. But I can't think of why specifically on your machine the issue exists

[ChrisMcD1]

/close

Closing for staleness, and an inability to reproduce.