Re: [PATCH] git-tag: Document that -m/-F create tag objects, too

* Julian Phillips:

On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:

quoted

And warn about the fact that lightweight tags are not normally
transferred by clone/fetch.

Um ... yes, they are (in v1.5.1 at least).

Hmm.  This has to be a fairly recent change, see:

<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/513438>

On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:

* Julian Phillips:

quoted

On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Florian Weimer wrote:

quoted

And warn about the fact that lightweight tags are not normally
transferred by clone/fetch.

Um ... yes, they are (in v1.5.1 at least).

Hmm.  This has to be a fairly recent change, see:

<http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/513438>

It's not that recent a change.  I have been cloning and fetching my 
tag-references for some time (being too lazy to use full tags for my 
one-man projects).  Certainly since v1.4.4 days ...

Fetch doesn't care whether a tag is a full tag or merely a reference, it 
will automatically fetch them both in the same way (not sure about clone). 
It checks that the reference points at an object, but not that the object 
is a tag rather than a commit.  This behaviour hasn't changed since the 
auto tag-following code was added (AFAIK).  Any difference between the 
treatment of tags and tag-references is a subtle consequence of the former 
adding an object I expect.

In the case of the v2.6.21-rc6 tag-reference anyone who did a clone or 
fetch and may have got the tag-reference provided that they didn't already 
have the commit it referenced?  I'm not 100% sure of the behaviour here, I 
haven't quite got to tag following in my C rewrite (I should be doing it 
later today).

-- 
Julian

  ---
Never call a man a fool.  Borrow from him.