Re: Pulling tags from git.git

[Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>]

A Large Angry SCM wrote:
> 
> Why is a "pull" bothering with tags? A "fetch" yes, but not a pull.
> 

A pull is a fetch + merge. I said pull because what little I know of 
Linus' workflow is the the emails he gets from susbsystem maintainers 
are called "pull requests".

>>
>> Tags not meant to be distributed are unannotated, and unannotated tags 
>> are kept out of published repos which are always stored at a central 
>> server. Everybody synchronize to those central repos, so nobody pulls 
>> from each other. Perhaps this is how the kernel devs work too, but if 
>> it ever changes the update hook will no longer be able to safeguard 
>> from it and the, in my eyes, temporary tags will be distributed in a 
>> criss-crossing mesh so no-one will ever know where it came from or who 
>> created it or why. I.e. a Bad Thing.
> 
> 
> The distinction here is not annotated tags or temporary tags but _local_ 
> tags. _Your_ workflow conventions treat unannotated tags as local tags 
> but declaring that unannotated tags can not be pushed is imposing _your_ 
> conventions on other groups. Just as branch names, themselves, can be 
> meaningful, so can tag names.
> 

Yes, that's why I said it's better to discourage than to disallow. The 
default update-hook is disabled by default and there are comments 
aplenty to make it possible even for the most die-hard point-and-click 
monkey to be able to comment out the disallowing of unannotated tags.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231