From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Branchaud Subject: Re: Local tag killer Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:22:32 -0400 Message-ID: <52419218.3020902@xiplink.com> References: <52327E62.2040301@alum.mit.edu> <523D3FD2.4090002@alum.mit.edu> <20130924075119.GD7257@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?B?Q2FybG9zIE1hcnTDrW4gTmlldG8=?= , Michael Schubert , Johan Herland To: Jeff King , Michael Haggerty X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 24 15:31:45 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VOSiO-00084T-Ne for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:31:45 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751138Ab3IXNbk (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:31:40 -0400 Received: from smtp138.ord.emailsrvr.com ([173.203.6.138]:57486 "EHLO smtp138.ord.emailsrvr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750766Ab3IXNbj (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:31:39 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 545 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:31:39 EDT Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp10.relay.ord1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 6D46B3703C7; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:22:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp10.relay.ord1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: mbranchaud-AT-xiplink.com) with ESMTPSA id C11313702DD; Tue, 24 Sep 2013 09:22:32 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 In-Reply-To: <20130924075119.GD7257@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 13-09-24 03:51 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 08:42:26AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> I think it would be preferable if "--prune" would *not* affect tags, and >> if there were an extra option like "--prune-tags" that would have to be >> used explicitly to cause tags to be pruned. Would somebody object to >> such a change? > > I think most of this problem is the way that we fetch tags straight into > the refs/tags hierarchy. You would not do: > > [remote "origin"] > fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/heads/* > prune = true > > unless you wanted to be a pure-mirror, because you would hose your local > changes any time you fetched. But that is _exactly_ what we do with a > refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* fetch. > > If we instead moved to a default fetch refspec more like: > > [remote "origin"] > fetch = +refs/*:refs/remotes/origin/refs/* I'm all for such a change. You no doubt recall the lengthy discussion about remote ref namespaces back in 2011 [1]. That arose while planning for 1.8, but my feeble recollection is that the change was considered too disruptive. It seems 2.0 would be a better home for such work. M. [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/165799/focus=166729