Re: [PATCH] peel_onion(): add support for <rev>^{tag}
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:57:50
Richard Hansen [off-list ref] writes:
gitrevisions(7) implies that <rev>^{tag} should work,...
Does it? Is it possible that that should be fixed?
What does it even _mean_ to peel something to a TAG?
A commit, a tree or a blob cannot be peeled to a tag---none of them
can contain a tag.
When you have a tag that points at something else, what you have is
already a tag, so <that-tag>^{tag} would be <that-tag> itself.
Even more confusingly, when you have a tag that points at another
tag, what does <that-outer-tag>^{tag} mean? The outer tag itself,
or do you need to peel at least once to reveal the inner-tag? What
if that inner-tag points at yet another tag?
The patch does not touch peel_to_type(), so your answer to the above
question seems to be "if T is already a tag, T^{tag} is T itself",
but then that operation does not look all that useful.
Confused...
quoted hunk
diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c index 90419ef..68fd0e4 100644 --- a/sha1_name.c +++ b/sha1_name.c@@ -677,6 +677,8 @@ static int peel_onion(const char *name, int len, unsigned char *sha1) sp++; /* beginning of type name, or closing brace for empty */ if (!strncmp(commit_type, sp, 6) && sp[6] == '}') expected_type = OBJ_COMMIT; + else if (!strncmp(tag_type, sp, 3) && sp[3] == '}') + expected_type = OBJ_TAG; else if (!strncmp(tree_type, sp, 4) && sp[4] == '}') expected_type = OBJ_TREE; else if (!strncmp(blob_type, sp, 4) && sp[4] == '}')