Suspicious of v1.5.0 tag object

Suspicious of v1.5.0 tag object

[Andy Parkins]

Hello,

I was just poking around and noticed this:

  $ git cat-file -p v1.5.0
  object 437b1b20df4b356c9342dac8d38849f24ef44f27
  type commit
  tag v1.5.0
  tagger Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> Wed Feb 14 00:00:00 2007 +0000

Is it really the case that you tagged v1.5.0 at midnight UTC exactly; and that 
you travelled from your normal -0800 timezone to +0000?  None of the other 
tags show this strange output.

  $ git cat-file -p v1.5.0.2
  object 0d9b9ab1284ce125fd49cf7dbf4d28e0540cf035
  type commit
  tag v1.5.0.2
  tagger Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> Mon Feb 26 00:26:21 2007 -0800

This looks much more normal.

Is the v1.5.0 tag object showing a bug? (The other possibility being that you 
did some clever messing to make it appear at exactly that moment)



Andy
-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET
andyparkins@gmail.com

Re: Suspicious of v1.5.0 tag object

[Junio C Hamano]

Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> writes:

> I was just poking around and noticed this:
>
>   $ git cat-file -p v1.5.0
>   object 437b1b20df4b356c9342dac8d38849f24ef44f27
>   type commit
>   tag v1.5.0
>   tagger Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> Wed Feb 14 00:00:00 2007 +0000
>
> Is it really the case that you tagged v1.5.0 at midnight UTC
> exactly; and that you travelled from your normal -0800
> timezone to +0000?  None of the other tags show this strange
> output.

Who are you referring to as "you" when your "To:" header reads
Git Mailing List ;-)?

That one and its commit object has that timestamp because the
release was supposed to be named "Rose scented bamboo".

Re: Suspicious of v1.5.0 tag object

[Andy Parkins]

On Tuesday 2007, March 20, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >   tagger Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> Wed Feb 14 00:00:00 2007
> > +0000
> >
> > Is it really the case that you tagged v1.5.0 at midnight UTC
>
> Who are you referring to as "you" when your "To:" header reads
> Git Mailing List ;-)?

Ah but the "tagger" reads Junio :-)

> That one and its commit object has that timestamp because the
> release was supposed to be named "Rose scented bamboo".

Fair enough.  Just thought I'd raise it in case it was a bug.


Andy
-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET
andyparkins@gmail.com

Re: Suspicious of v1.5.0 tag object

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi,

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> That one and its commit object has that timestamp because the release 
> was supposed to be named "Rose scented bamboo".

You cannot name it like that. Unless I am mistaken, "Rose scented bamboo" 
is no British slang word.

Ciao,
Dscho