From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a2-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30C4F1FC0E5 for ; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:54:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733136883; cv=none; b=gEDr0HpVJ0unB5gGcOTz0HCD0EKA8KG0ObmFByRzD4MMpHmw3Gpbxv19otpnfyGvQVZaVpOGv/3VjRDh84HcyrLXjHlA3KQdceyLk+PzVsB4iheyLNE4DCm8fHJgV/UBACf89I01v279vpro/Z3KYNFS0WUD3+uuQiesylTwWms= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733136883; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mVhK20aX164m3UEPsCi8zjWtkRtQXG8OHSPYbG218hY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jpfaCHUXzOMMLIoSS2jIifEhOoCp6yn34CLsvOsbFXlVdhDKcl/TP3FZgUrdA7vAGTs/1op4d7dHPO1tMEw9/Z2gSuFtRaAQ5yDXQrrDir63tll/AGPtXGrSaHn4QKYO41csp8N40Xf1u+zhwoZEL4R9Mh8kNrU83cWxVQihcGA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=SxuwZ9NY; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=q51Iuzt9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.153 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="SxuwZ9NY"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="q51Iuzt9" Received: from phl-compute-04.internal (phl-compute-04.phl.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 314AE11401B4; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 05:54:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-02 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-04.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 02 Dec 2024 05:54:40 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1733136880; x=1733223280; bh=VuyB7AXE4H un8atDJGsqs6NmcNx/jFN86kDhD6hHpGw=; b=SxuwZ9NY1119SDeWtKCOHEe9XR 1vSRDwBIcMQfO1w8WZE3fVcuLBZzBYc5V4QgBcg/VxBBrgVCqFDZbtwM8KqafZjb +jQ39MxmE+Kp7GNonRr3EgR9x7+0rMvSOL0FTUBKrCy0B2clM93U1s1VHfw0X0so wWEXW0rEQ+xA86h+COvN0Qo1bCqSzRd7lJM4zziwAMTOWkEQv/4MBtIOSEAh6HUC vkezJrSYb033IUrl0LuQKPlVV5+wZwP7x92/gW3tRSR165u/ZHEHSwlL59eosMMD 33RTyA7Joe3fFckTR7KtW2juODRiUS98ej2O8l7if+rijkqhi3q5Y8w14j3A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1733136880; x=1733223280; bh=VuyB7AXE4Hun8atDJGsqs6NmcNx/jFN86kD hD6hHpGw=; b=q51Iuzt9D6HG/Fw+YqU2HCb2ZhqRmp3oFss98IsmxBgfwCJGSXi dcYE60fq7XO9bRnbfGVi5D9Czam5vDly9VMIvQeyPuRFMAkwwHsMHR0rBSIpOUad ouBN1m5i23JHfhn8xgdthCSg9YLGXvjKg2CIhMFlmNPKj5NL1El+BVnI1vW1t/uC 7NY78Xh70xtnwJSzsHxJcNdVyIunhlS80XN4nfkQp69Tb1WxSQvlToyzi8KCz8kP SOFEpH6IBZCZe3eqOdpACiPtXoIFd8C76eHHH4NSLuNR/HHei8P6rbEDug6ZBOfl Q5bVerNZctX5j5A3XEznaCseAY0u81nDPlA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefuddrheelgddvudcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpuffr tefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepfffhvfevuf fkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomheprfgrthhrihgtkhcuufhtvghinhhh rghrughtuceophhssehpkhhsrdhimheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepveekkeffhfeitd eludeigfejtdetvdelvdduhefgueegudfghfeukefhjedvkedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfu ihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphhssehpkhhsrdhimhdpnhgspg hrtghpthhtohepgedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphgvfhhfsehp vghffhdrnhgvthdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpd hrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihht sehjohifihhlrdguvg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 2 Dec 2024 05:54:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by vm-mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id a29715b9 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Mon, 2 Dec 2024 10:53:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 11:54:21 +0100 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, git@jowil.de, Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] tag: "git tag" refuses to use HEAD as a tagname Message-ID: References: <20241202070714.3028549-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20241202070714.3028549-5-gitster@pobox.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241202070714.3028549-5-gitster@pobox.com> On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 04:07:14PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c > index a24bfe3845..01ef2a3093 100644 > --- a/refs.c > +++ b/refs.c > @@ -735,7 +735,7 @@ int check_branch_ref(struct strbuf *sb, const char *name) > > int check_tag_ref(struct strbuf *sb, const char *name) > { > - if (name[0] == '-') > + if (name[0] == '-' || !strcmp(name, "HEAD")) > return -1; > > strbuf_reset(sb); I was thinking a bit about whether we can spin this a bit wider and disallow creation of any refname that looks like a root ref. But I don't think that would make sense, as root refs are defined as all-uppercase refs living in the root, and disallowing tags that look like this would go way too far. So I then wondered what a reasonable alternative would be, and the only rule I could come up with was to disallow root refs with "HEAD" in it. But even that doesn't feel reasonable to me. All to say: singling out "HEAD" feels like a sensible step, and I don't think we should handle root refs more generally here. The other patches look good to me, as well. Thanks! Patrick