From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: newbie questions about git design and features (some wrt hg) Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 19:44:13 +0100 Message-ID: <200702021944.14756.jnareb@gmail.com> References: <3c6c07c20701300820l42cfc8dbsb80393fc1469f667@mail.gmail.com> <200702021818.11368.jnareb@gmail.com> <20070202173758.GC10108@waste.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mercurial@selenic.com, git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Matt Mackall X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 02 20:10:42 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HD3nu-0001bo-Df for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 20:10:34 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423039AbXBBTKb (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:10:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423056AbXBBTKb (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:10:31 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175]:27175 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423039AbXBBTKb (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Feb 2007 14:10:31 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 44so842303uga for ; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:10:29 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=luH6zcCWHqTMFle67AEPp3BBIuqpgD2WdzCw7EL3Ereg69v6bQSILUtA4xFY1QN3/x4N0ibyscjBdHka3gZu0x6o2TgkWtnfWrDit0fiwSHgJDIOqrGZfMkSjr6coJiPHLowxcNuD2S3dqpGD1mcvfrYPlAqigeF9Sud8oJKx+I= Received: by 10.67.26.7 with SMTP id d7mr4840875ugj.1170443429455; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:10:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from host-81-190-29-4.torun.mm.pl ( [81.190.29.4]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 54sm5842064ugp.2007.02.02.11.10.27; Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:10:28 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 In-Reply-To: <20070202173758.GC10108@waste.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Matt Mackall wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 06:18:10PM +0100, Jakub Narebski wrote: >> Revision-controlled (in-tree) tags are inane idea. Tags are non-moving >> (and sometimes annotated) pointers to given point in history. They should >> not depend on which branch you are, or what version you have checked out. > > And.. they don't! If that means that you always use the version of .hgtags from the tip (branches are tips of history; they can have different .hgtags), this is also broken; this means for example that you cannot compare current version when on development head (branch) with tag on different branch, those two branches have the same .hgtags file. "They should not depend on which branch you are"... and they can. > I'm now officially done correcting your uninformed perceptions. Come > back when you've actually looked at the docs. URL, pretty please? My mistake is caused by the fact that .hgtags is special, i.e. not current version is used (as e.g. with .scmignore files) but version closest to the tip. This means broken abstraction. -- Jakub Narebski Poland