From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Local tag killer Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:18:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20130930231803.GA23218@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <5246C975.1050504@alum.mit.edu> <5247ACB9.40208@alum.mit.edu> <52499797.9030100@xiplink.com> <5249CDF7.4050904@xiplink.com> <5249E9C8.1070700@xiplink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Marc Branchaud , Michael Haggerty , Johan Herland , Junio C Hamano , Git mailing list , Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C3=ADn?= Nieto , Michael Schubert To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 01 01:18:13 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VQmjD-0004BA-RT for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Oct 2013 01:18:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755224Ab3I3XSI (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:18:08 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:59426 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754451Ab3I3XSH (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:18:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 12369 invoked by uid 102); 30 Sep 2013 23:18:06 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 30 Sep 2013 18:18:06 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:18:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:44:09PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > Again, I don't think that's the common case. I think it's just as likely for > > there to be multiple remotes with duplicate tag names that refer to different > > objects. > > Why do you say so? I'm curious to know what kind of work flow would do > that in practice. > > At least for typical Linux kernel workflows what I said above is true. I could image if you are fetching from a bunch of coworkers that several people might reuse a common name like "start" or "tmp" for different purposes. But I think the behavior you've described handles that quite naturally. If there is one "start", or if they all match, it is unambiguous. If there are multiple matches, git says "which one did you mean?" and you can say "bob/start" or "alice/start" to disambiguate. Anything else would be a guess. If _you_ have a refs/tags/start, then I think that should unambiguously take precedence over that of your coworkers. That way your coworkers cannot pollute the lookup of items in your own namespace. -Peff