Re: [PATCH] bundle-uri: copy all bundle references ino the refs/bundle space

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Scott Chacon <schacon@gmail.com> writes:

> Hey,
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 12:36 AM Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The intention of the design is to avoid having the bundle URI fetch
>> changing tag refs, especially annotated tags. Those tag updates are
>> expected to be advertised in the "git fetch" output. It would probably
>> be best to peel the tag refs to a commit and then create a fake branch
>> for the bundle.

I am not sure where that need to avoid including tags comes from.

>> The biggest question I had (and tried to get ahead of on the PR) is
>> the use of a test to demonstrate what kind of bundle files cause this
>> issue. It would be important to demosntrate that the repo is still
>> usable if "refs/bundles/tags/v1.0" exists and points to a tag object.
>
> I have written a test and I'll submit the new series in a minute, but
> I'm not sure what you mean by 'usable' in this context. Is there a
> situation where Git gets mad if there are annotated tags that aren't
> under refs/tags?

I do not know of any at least for a local consumption of these tags.

> I have done these test clones and nothing bad seems to happen having
> them in refs/bundle/tags/v1.0 that I notice, but I don't know how to
> write a test that specifically verifies that.

Can it be some brittleness Derrick is worried about auto-following
of tags during future "git fetch"?  You store a tag that a regular
fetch may want to store at refs/tags/v1.0 in refs/bundles/tags/v1.0
taken from the bundle, and then a later fetch may advance the
history based on you extracted from the bundle---without having to
run an explicit "git fetch --tags" or "git fetch origin v1.0", would
we ever obtain "refs/tags/v1.0" with only the usual auto-following
when we have the same tag elsewhere?

In any case, instead of me speculating, I'd prefer to hear from
Derrick, who is a lot more familiar with the mechanism under
discussion, what the issues are that we want to limit ourselves to
local branches.

Thanks.