From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: git describe bug? Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:31:47 -0700 Message-ID: <20100402183147.GA20007@spearce.org> References: <0B8BD2B7-E6F9-4EFC-BCD6-2B2E876AD1FC@spy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Dustin Sallings X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 02 20:31:58 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nxlev-0006VC-4k for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 20:31:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752212Ab0DBSbw (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:31:52 -0400 Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:38346 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751523Ab0DBSbv (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:31:51 -0400 Received: by pwi5 with SMTP id 5so1862318pwi.19 for ; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:31:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.252.8 with SMTP id z8mr1833795rvh.35.1270233110157; Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:31:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (george.spearce.org [209.20.77.23]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm2110928iwn.7.2010.04.02.11.31.48 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0B8BD2B7-E6F9-4EFC-BCD6-2B2E876AD1FC@spy.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dustin Sallings wrote: > > describe does not choose the most recent tag when multiple tags point to a single commit (for example, when an RC release becomes a proper release). > > There's a bit of conflict in the documentation between the following: > > ``tags with newer dates will always be preferred over tags with older dates'' > > and the next sentence: > > ``If an exact match is found, its name will be output and searching will stop.'' > > The code does not allow for multiple exact matches, leading to what I would consider incorrect behavior as shown below: Yes, I've seen this too. IIRC we've actually discussed this in the past. I can't find the thread (my search skills are sub-par despite who I work for...). But the general idea if I remember it right was we wanted to use the older tag, because that tag came first. So its probably more a documentation bug than a software bug. -- Shawn.