Re: Bootstrapping into git, commit gripes at me

[Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>]

Marc Singer <elf@buici.com> writes:

> I picked 2.6.12
>
>   # git checkout -f v2.6.12
>
> applied the patch and was greeted with an error about being unable to
> commit telling me that I LONG_HEX_NUMBER is not a valid commit object.
> Isn't 2.6.12 later than 2.6.12-rcX?

Aha.  Marc is not doing anything wrong --- he is doing as he is
told.

Linus, there is a bad interaction between tag objects and
commits right now.  For example:

 - we allow git-checkout-script with a tag; I think we store the tag
   object without dereferencing in .git/HEAD;

 - git-commit-tree says check_valid("commit") and barfs.

I think other things are covered already and the above two are
the only remaining major ones.  The merge-base command dereferences tags
and produces a commit as its result.  The rev-list command also
derefs tags, so log and whatchanged would work sensibly.

My current preference is to keep .git/refs/heads tag free.  At
least, I do not think we should ever write non commits to
.git/*_HEAD.

What do you think?  An alternative would be to allow tags
(recursively) pointing at a commit as a commit parent, but I do
not think we would want to go that route.