From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Witten Subject: Lost association between TAGS and COMMITs when rebased a git(1) repository Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2011 14:03:12 -0000 Message-ID: <3c10d6593152436c9dd3a5b5773e3c79-mfwitten@gmail.com> References: Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "John S. Urban" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Sep 04 16:07:36 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 1R0DMF-0003x2-MR for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:07:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754174Ab1IDOH3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Sep 2011 10:07:29 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:47712 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753861Ab1IDOH2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Sep 2011 10:07:28 -0400 Received: by fxh19 with SMTP id 19so3090819fxh.19 for ; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:07:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references; bh=dwidqZYFr22qQxZEHEy+d0R0gkpYd8zhZ8FwaFR/AeY=; b=mikOegiXfW40nhVzh0bxPdLt8viU2htD0BJBd+Pqtlh96JB5G9bLEi+z5EDhQLnlH1 LyYX8lBOuxD+j8aWQvgtllCidGL0YTa7xSyxSTZKxNvufDIeIGWtBYIo2hR5IwkffZsm eS27G2LsJ5eA7oUma5WJsKhk9mOv43sOQN9Sc= Received: by 10.223.102.11 with SMTP id e11mr1404869fao.8.1315145246894; Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:07:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (zoe.desire.se [85.8.28.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m8sm2930865fae.17.2011.09.04.07.07.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 04 Sep 2011 07:07:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 21:32:03 -0400, John S. Urban wrote: > With my first use of git(1) I created a small project with about 200 > "commits". When this was complete, I needed to label each commit with > information pointing it to a section of a document. What exactly does that mean? > I used tags for this. It sounds like `git notes' or rewritten commit messages would be what is appropriate. > So far, everything was fine. I was then asked to merge two commits > into one. I then did a "rebase" (for the first time). You mean `squash'; the term `merge' has a specific meaning in git nomenclature. > Also, I have some commits with multiple tags pointing to them. It has come > to my attention that might not be an intentional feature. I could find > nothing in the documentation explicitly stating multiple tags were allowed > to point to a commit; but the tags seem to be unique "objects" so I > see no reason this should not be an expected feature? Well, everybody, it sounds like John's confusion is a good example for why `tag' is another TERRIBLE choice of terminology. See here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/179609 Message-ID: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/179942 Message-ID: