Thread (7 messages) flat view 7 messages, 5 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: git-pull and tag objects

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:42:54

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)


On Mon, 12 Feb 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"fsck --full" should report "dangling tag".
Well, except if
 - you've pruned
 - the importer never imported anything but the most recent one.

One thing that _might_ be a good idea for tags (if people _really_ want to 
actually update tags under the same name) is to have a "parent" pointer 
for tag objects, the same way we have for commits. That way you could - if 
you really wanted to - create a chain of tags, and show the history of 
them.

Now, I personally think you'd be better off just having separate names, 
but for something like a "passed testing" tag, it might be valid to (a) 
have the last one and (b) have a history chain. And it's not like it would 
be technically "hard" to do.

I dunno. Personally I'd rather try to just tell people to not re-use 
tag-names, because it kind of destroys the whole point of a tag ("I 
checked out tag X!" just leadsto "_Which_ X?").

And you could certainly do the "passed testing" thing with commits in a 
separate branch instead: you'd create the "testing" branch, which is 
always a set of commits that have as their primary parent the commit that 
got tested, and as the second parent the previous commit in the "testing" 
series).

So _generally_ I think we're better off keeping things the way they are, 
but on the other hand, if only to work well with idiotic systems that 
mis-use tags in ways that tags shouldn't be used, we *could* just extend 
on what tyou can do with a git tag too..

		Linus
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help