Re: [PATCH 1/4] Make tag names (i.e. the tag object's "tag" line) optional

Johan Herland [off-list ref] writes:

The tag line is now optional. If not given in the tag object data, it
defaults to the empty string ("") in the parsed tag object.

Sorry, I may have missed the discussion.  I recall that we
talked about tagger line which may not exist for historical
reasons, but have we heard any reasoning behind this?

On Monday 11 June 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Johan Herland [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

The tag line is now optional. If not given in the tag object data, it
defaults to the empty string ("") in the parsed tag object.

Sorry, I may have missed the discussion.  I recall that we
talked about tagger line which may not exist for historical
reasons, but have we heard any reasoning behind this?

In the discussion that followed the first proof-of-concept of 'notes',
I argued that the "tag" header is _really_ only needed for
signed tag objects (although we want it for annotated tags as well),
and that it doesn't make sense to specify a tag name for unnamed 'note'
objects.

If the "tag" line remains mandatory, I'll have to construct an
artificial name for unnamed 'notes'...


...Johan

-- 
Johan Herland, [off-list ref]
www.herland.net

Johan Herland [off-list ref] writes:

If the "tag" line remains mandatory, I'll have to construct an
artificial name for unnamed 'notes'...

Ah, silly me, now I remember.

But let's put this series on hold and see how versioned set of
notes from Johannes turns out.  It seems that people are in
favor of its simplicity, and even though it may be much less
expressive, it might be sufficient for certain class of
applications.  It one certainly is a much smaller and isolated
change that we could easily drop more easily if it does not work
out.