From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git describe candidate filtering Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:12:03 -0800 Message-ID: <7vodcv3yz0.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <4760C250.5080103@byu.net> <20071213055746.GV14735@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Blake , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Shawn O. Pearce" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 13 07:12:41 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J2hJI-0005Gt-02 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 07:12:40 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752520AbXLMGMR (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:12:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752431AbXLMGMR (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:12:17 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:65502 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752253AbXLMGMQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:12:16 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBA17946; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:12:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D9B87943; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 01:12:04 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20071213055746.GV14735@spearce.org> (Shawn O. Pearce's message of "Thu, 13 Dec 2007 00:57:46 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > We only match things that were "added". So if you don't add a tag > via add_to_known_names() then git-describe won't return it. > > However that's only true for the standard case; for --contains its > a different story as we are actually passing everything to name-rev. A good news is that name-rev is supposed to respect the name limiter.