From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Drew Northup Subject: Re: git push tags Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:21:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: <508D7628.10509@kdbg.org> <4B8097A9D6854CDFA27E7CF6574B37BA@PhilipOakley> <508E532F.2010109@alum.mit.edu> <20121029103837.GA14614@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Michael Haggerty , Angelo Borsotti , Philip Oakley , Chris Rorvick , Johannes Sixt , git To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Oct 29 12:22:08 2012 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 1TSnPz-0003pB-Av for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 12:22:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758681Ab2J2LVy (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:21:54 -0400 Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:46406 "EHLO mail-bk0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758668Ab2J2LVy (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2012 07:21:54 -0400 Received: by mail-bk0-f46.google.com with SMTP id jk13so1902524bkc.19 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:21:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=mYsubj3mkb5s+zOzm0Lf1rc2RVgfgpUvq/o0xxhlzyA=; b=o9B8UGizcxOBGzzfZiPn7Vgizj7hPrqdjSuqwzVvZhPy8rWONQLaVIDJQg4apP8UA1 7Pkc0SycPN8zn1QuUqSvutSJzYn/lMIRDTWQ78/reOjYIj84xU+qoHutHCjO5cYjBU6u G2aBHgYVVgXMooA3e89p9YEuK0FT8ie14tz6uDrUM5dR7asyCK/7rsod7NN8DTBUHxSI VQDZeAlQduRpYZs0P+JpG8Ie1yvvOpfgHHSVHjiPgQomBWr2woM6SV6gsJkkGKX5dD4Y eE1wI8g156YCy14eoxmUV/vsiVjdN86BDNk5osnFlfSKQ0CiVxXEOKKqoNGq/xHfelBT KOzw== Received: by 10.204.9.3 with SMTP id j3mr9338880bkj.15.1351509712745; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:21:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.205.122.144 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 04:21:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20121029103837.GA14614@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:58:07AM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> I agree with you that it is too easy to create chaos by changing tags in >> a published repository and that git should do more to prevent this from >> happening without explicit user forcing. The fact that git internally >> handles tags similarly to other references is IMO an excuse for the >> current behavior, but not a justification. > > I would have expected git to at least complain about updating an > annotated tag with another annotated tag. But it actually uses the same > fast-forward rule, just on the pointed-to commits. So a fast-forward > annotated re-tag will throw away the old tag object completely. Which > seems a bit crazy to me. > > It seems like a no-brainer to me that annotated tags should not replace > each other without a force, no matter where in the refs hierarchy they > go. > > For lightweight tags, I think it's more gray. They are just pointers > into history. Some projects may use them to tag immutable official > versions, but I also see them used as shared bookmarks. Requiring "-f" > may make the latter use more annoying. On the other hand, bookmark tags > tend not to be pushed, or if they are, it is part of a mirror-like > backup which should be forcing all updates anyway. Would that be an endorsement of continuing to build a patch set including the snippet that Kacper posted earlier (1) in response to my comment about not being sure how complicated all of this would be or not? [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/208473 -- -Drew Northup -------------------------------------------------------------- "As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?" -John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59