Re: Git tag output order is incorrect (IMHO)

Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] writes:

Rahul Bansal [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

IMHO "git tag" is expected to show tag-list ordered by versions. 

A git tag can be anything, not related to versions at all.

Correct.

But that does not prevent somebody to add "git tag --sort=X" option
to the command, just like "git for-each-ref" has "--sort=X" option.

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 12:40:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Andreas Schwab [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Rahul Bansal [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

IMHO "git tag" is expected to show tag-list ordered by versions. 

A git tag can be anything, not related to versions at all.

Correct.

But that does not prevent somebody to add "git tag --sort=X" option
to the command, just like "git for-each-ref" has "--sort=X" option.

A while ago I started on (but did not get very far on) unifying the ref
selection code for for-each-ref, tag, and branch. It would be nice if
they all supported the same set of --contains/--points-at/--merged/--sort,
etc.

I do plan to finish it eventually, but if anyone else feels like picking
it up, I'd be glad to review patches and/or share my work-in-progress as
a starting point.

-Peff

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

I do plan to finish it eventually, but if anyone else feels like picking
it up, I'd be glad to review patches and/or share my work-in-progress as
a starting point.

Hi Jeff,
I have some free time to come, and would like to work on that feature.
Does the offer still hold ?
If it does, I would be interested in your patches.

Cheers,

On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:12:47PM +0200, Antoine Pelisse wrote:

On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I do plan to finish it eventually, but if anyone else feels like picking
it up, I'd be glad to review patches and/or share my work-in-progress as
a starting point.

I have some free time to come, and would like to work on that feature.
Does the offer still hold ?
If it does, I would be interested in your patches.

I'm sorry I have taken so long to get back to you on this. I was hoping
to revisit the topic and make sure the patches were in a sensible state
for showing to somebody. But it took me some time to get around to it,
and now that I have, they're really not looking very good.

My general strategy was to factor out all of the "which refs to select"
code from git-tag (which knows --contains and --points-at) and
git-branch (which knows --merged, --no-merged, and --contains), and then
make them all available in a library-ish way to both commands, as well
as for-each-ref (which also knows name matching, which all 3 should
know, too). You can see my messy in-progress commit (that does not even
compile) at:

  git://github.com/peff/git.git jk/contains-wip

Part of the complication is that the filters have to happen at different
times (you can efficiently ask "--contains" for each ref as you see it,
but asking "--merged" must happen after you have collected each one).

I do not recall at this point what other issues led me to stop working
on it (it may simply have been time for dinner, and I never came back to
it). So the patches there may or may not actually be helpful to you.

Sorry I can't be more helpful. I'd be happy to discuss or review if you
want to work on it.

-Peff

On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 04:03:11AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

quoted

I have some free time to come, and would like to work on that feature.
Does the offer still hold ?
If it does, I would be interested in your patches.

I'm sorry I have taken so long to get back to you on this. I was hoping
to revisit the topic and make sure the patches were in a sensible state
for showing to somebody. But it took me some time to get around to it,
and now that I have, they're really not looking very good.

Hi Antoine,

Since I haven't heard anything, I assume you haven't been working on
this. But in case you have, I wanted to let you know I found some time
and moved the topic forward a bit. It's not quite ready to share with
the list, but I wanted to notify you so we didn't duplicate effort.

-Peff

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 7:56 PM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 04:03:11AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

quoted

quoted

I have some free time to come, and would like to work on that feature.
Does the offer still hold ?
If it does, I would be interested in your patches.

I'm sorry I have taken so long to get back to you on this. I was hoping
to revisit the topic and make sure the patches were in a sensible state
for showing to somebody. But it took me some time to get around to it,
and now that I have, they're really not looking very good.

Hi Antoine,

Since I haven't heard anything, I assume you haven't been working on
this. But in case you have, I wanted to let you know I found some time
and moved the topic forward a bit. It's not quite ready to share with
the list, but I wanted to notify you so we didn't duplicate effort.

Unfortunately, I didn't have as much time as expected to work on this topic.
I'm glad to hear that it's moving forward and will definitely have a
look when you send the patches to the list.
Thank you for letting me know,

Cheers,
Antoine