From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8899720899 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 19:41:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753299AbdHQTlT (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:19 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:59647 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752632AbdHQTlS (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:18 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 521538D74A; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:11 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=1nA1WjJU8FBb1Whjx8vgjP+7TPM=; b=JYjcJ9 UP9xWOUvVfLXJvwxXWrCfv3BDC6b5LNTJY5XyQTEsQV760OvtKs9VQ2FaUOtG9C4 KijNfH3I/zTq576qO3LiZQVLePwX45OW0365rsMQmZUWkzyn08LnOML0erFcv8Ko X5C3baLBKX8K+geaV7HIiNJ5Q2ilANGrvu0S8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Q6S+kExtNotxGE48lin+s6VCQcIx05yM VC0UIdhVbtepnPdKiRxzcOZ8PiKOyL+jPcSuk8t7voodq6dAJGqb45bewfqlnxVv qIP0o5LcJSK2T9J4A4upgJ5qJ5ZcTm6A7fqUlIsI8dEhU2+82NY1IHcrqf9URgOk SMijY44l/7Q= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4929E8D749; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6D2C8D747; Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:41:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: "Carlsson\, Magnus" , "git\@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: git fetch with refspec does not include tags? References: <1502960406180.9006@arris.com> <1502960572292.1402@arris.com> <20170817092853.hteuzni5lxia4ejf@sigill.intra.peff.net> <1502969387926.66865@arris.com> <20170817142233.v2c534zh6wv7ttei@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 12:41:09 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170817142233.v2c534zh6wv7ttei@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:22:33 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 055CEB9E-8384-11E7-8063-FE4B1A68708C-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I think it's a bit more complex because "git pull" uses "git fetch" > under the hood. In fact, your "git fetch origin master" is exactly what > gets run when you do: > > git pull origin master > > That's maybe OK. But I think one-off pulls like: > > git pull https://example.com/repo.git master > > probably wouldn't want it. I'd have to give it some thought. I agree with both. If you have named remote, you presumably are keeping copies of their branches as remote-tracking branches, and it may be fine to follow tags. An explicit URL used for one-off should not grab anything but the named thing, I would think.