From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Theodore Tso Subject: Re: Git/Mercurial interoperability (and what about bzr?) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 21:13:28 -0400 Message-ID: <20081102011328.GG8134@mit.edu> References: <20081028191234.GS24201@genesis.frugalware.org> <20081028213144.GC10862@mit.edu> <87ljw3zx8i.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <87abcjpvy2.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> <20081101133931.GC8134@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Weimer , Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 02 02:14:54 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KwRYL-0005kR-5G for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 02:14:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752192AbYKBBNg (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Nov 2008 21:13:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752177AbYKBBNf (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Nov 2008 21:13:35 -0400 Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.org ([69.25.196.31]:59161 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752174AbYKBBNf (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Nov 2008 21:13:35 -0400 Received: from root (helo=closure.thunk.org) by thunker.thunk.org with local-esmtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1KwRWz-0003lC-7W; Sat, 01 Nov 2008 21:13:29 -0400 Received: from tytso by closure.thunk.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KwRWy-00067B-Jm; Sat, 01 Nov 2008 21:13:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 10:51:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Nov 2008, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > > .hgtags is stored as a versioned file in Mercurial. That's one of the > > problems, and it leads to no shortage of headaches. > > I told people this was insane long long ago, and I thought the hg people > had learnt to use local tags. They act sanely, as far as I know (ie they > act the same way git tags do). > > Of course, the problem with hg local tags is that hg apparently has no > sane way to _propagate_ such local tag-space information from one > repository to another. But that's purely a problem with hg itself. I don't > know why that hasn't gotten fixed. Yeah, well, hg calls them _local_ tags, and so people consider that by design, they aren't supposed to be propagated outside of the local repository. As I recall, hg doesn't support GPG signing local tags, for the same reason. - Ted