From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [rfd] auto-following tags upon "git push"? Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:30:51 -0400 Message-ID: <20110607173051.GA22216@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <7v4o417g9s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 07 19:31:08 2011 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 1QU07K-00062C-QE for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 19:31:03 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932115Ab1FGRa4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:30:56 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:41346 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932111Ab1FGRaz (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 13:30:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 17630 invoked by uid 107); 7 Jun 2011 17:31:01 -0000 Received: from c-76-21-13-32.hsd1.ca.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (76.21.13.32) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:31:01 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 07 Jun 2011 13:30:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v4o417g9s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:33:35AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > So, while we still should _never_ automatically push any tag that points > at a commit that is being pushed out (i.e. inverse of "fetch" that auto > follows tags), if the user or the project can give a clear enough hint to > git which tags are for public consumption, we should at least be able to > push tags that are for public consumption and do point at commits that are > being pushed out. > > This is just me thinking out loud, but a typical end-user transcript may > look something like this: > > Tell git that v*.* and v*.*.* are release tags (one-time set-up). > $ git config --unset-all push.autotag > $ git config --add push.autotag 'v*.*' > $ git config --add push.autotag 'v*.*.*' Hmm. Is it a clear enough hint when the user uses an actual tag object to make a signed or annotated tag? At least for me, private throw-away tags tend to just be refs/tags/foo pointing to a commit, and real, for-public-consumption tags at least get an annotation, if not a signature. I seem to recall we make a similar distinction somewhere else in the code, but I can't remember offhand where. Maybe it was just a proposal that never made it anywhere. Anyway, the problem would be somebody who does something like: $ git tag -m "here is a description of how this wip is going" foo-wip which violates the assumption above. I have no idea how common that is (I tend to write such descriptions into a WIP commit message, and if I really want to, tag the resulting commit directly). -Peff