Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] Prep for "git fetch" should not clobber existing tags without --force

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  [off-list ref] writes:

This is unchanged from what's been cooking in pu for months now, so
hopefully it can be merged down faster than most, and then I can later
submit the actual meat of this series once I fix the (mostly doc)
issues with it.

They have been held in 'pu' only because you said they were not
ready, I think ;-)

I can confirm that the first 5 do look the same, and you dropped the
old 6, 8 and 10.  The remainder look the same.

I quickly re-scanned them and all of them looked obviously good.
Will discard the remainder and requeue.

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason (7):
  fetch tests: change "Tag" test tag to "testTag"
  push tests: remove redundant 'git push' invocation
  push tests: fix logic error in "push" test assertion
  push tests: add more testing for forced tag pushing
  push tests: assert re-pushing annotated tags
  fetch tests: correct a comment "remove it" -> "remove them"
  pull doc: fix a long-standing grammar error

 Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt |  2 +-
 t/t5510-fetch.sh                   |  2 +-
 t/t5516-fetch-push.sh              | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++---------
 3 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

On Mon, Aug 13 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

This is unchanged from what's been cooking in pu for months now, so
hopefully it can be merged down faster than most, and then I can later
submit the actual meat of this series once I fix the (mostly doc)
issues with it.

They have been held in 'pu' only because you said they were not
ready, I think ;-)

You had some feedback to 6, 8 & 10 in the last round which I haven't
addressed yet.

I think the "not ready" comment you're remembering is this for v1:
https://public-inbox.org/git/CACBZZX4yG5h5kk4NFQz_NzAweMa+Nh3H-39OHtcH4XWsA6FGpg@mail.gmail.com/

I can confirm that the first 5 do look the same, and you dropped the
old 6, 8 and 10.  The remainder look the same.

Yup!

I quickly re-scanned them and all of them looked obviously good.
Will discard the remainder and requeue.

Thanks!