From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA4D11D6DB9 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2025 19:08:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752260906; cv=none; b=ZPZOkyahRAgNHeOaccoJHnDCZqmz6oV+KwNoO79FQWv+l3R0WRJ0eBV+LRfFQaLAMfybBJWr2plb/kOG1ke9FRzkpQNg0C6GBhqDgbwmnF/pUyocV9xq4ZvzDV6SQwyJfvRXTPVjrKdtT05KAi6Nkr8a60FlCcPYIpvMDVC1tOU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752260906; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xOKIXjNjOfAfTaHUB6psVO88djxDx2qyHa0JMNEITAU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gseDJFybB7S7B884oVEQF9gCE1kvA9exbOBujCgS169JYdJ+IgDDoolsVSQOnB+XF834Nj5MAe/Z627/TlbFmr7TIpfdNsZQzOVpd303kmImG80zwzaEls87ZFuVCenTOl46oNK6w6/q05sbgeVJkUMAlTd2T7xc30tIIzsIn34= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=ilnJUg3u; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=QFcBm4cf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ilnJUg3u"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="QFcBm4cf" Received: from phl-compute-12.internal (phl-compute-12.phl.internal [10.202.2.52]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10A9C1D002A9; Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:08:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-12.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:08:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1752260903; x=1752347303; bh=5gS4/gudNh 8oRAlMmjA8QFF2rO0864UXtytWsggXcDE=; b=ilnJUg3u7SkvGjeO07+pNcUsrX N7UlrtbOk8hns7Qx0SIDt55MpBB7Mtdu5EmtHMjW+VAELrX3sE2qY1i3BALZ6s7+ yHOiv9nHxfVhqOeHD8TqM7lWQGcQNsVqp4tHRAUOZeFDtU6rD8M96OFeqHkmt6/L ZpTGoXQGp3vbshDabhDr129HpF1t6FU/TDRSS7Qp9G+iHuRAk4CCaFGLwB/CoVXY 1N1r8etEYRjvLie+5z0SCA3OHirdFbbWVJg9Xr29d6tCCb1JuT8HMiyiLEEGbKw1 5Lysd6qhZjOsG/5Cqkrwai2XXLq+io9adIxLYXuh1KKSFuRFhSQUNw6NABRw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1752260903; x=1752347303; bh=5gS4/gudNh8oRAlMmjA8QFF2rO0864UXtyt WsggXcDE=; b=QFcBm4cff77l5psFDAoiDmSOok/2EVUjQ/1G4iG9ZWjc1yip5wF WI3F1FMlg4nj2HyBh1KjlIjMdcmodW77deOlN9ngpjcIcvEU6MJkMqzFdgRW/fLc UenkboMdlrbFCBldRiMOHqO/tH/eIV2UR9yTuwT19W13KZQ23XemBsmty0K84xi3 BSYwFYr1ar9/8CZnkRlY3FjBUIIQVafDpChsprKEeFU4v5AOLwbbCpxTNV0owenJ PX97Uy0+x/2oLWjLrPOJx1sPK19vlEG40bz2Yv4/QtSrVb27OM/Z9vbWhu3ik6PK 6mtuw5uxgyiI9pIYbEDLXoW5x4StEhoN06A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdefgdeggeduvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieeg ieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeegpdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehrshgsvggtkhgvrhesnhgvgigsrhhiughgvgdrtghomh dprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohep mhhirhhthhdrhhhitghkfhhorhgusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhith hsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:08:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Cc: "'Git Mailing List'" , "'M Hickford'" Subject: Re: Suggestion: error "tag ... already exists" should distinguish between tagging different or same commit: In-Reply-To: <00ca01dbef94$b155f380$1401da80$@nexbridge.com> (rsbecker@nexbridge.com's message of "Mon, 7 Jul 2025 19:12:58 -0400") References: <00ca01dbef94$b155f380$1401da80$@nexbridge.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 12:08:22 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain writes: > Considering that git tag T O will generally require a git push > --force and always a git pull --force in order to update tags on > the upstream and receiving an update to the tag locally, I think > requiring git tag --force T O when O is different from the current > tag is a reasonable idea from a consistency standpoint. I do > support the notion of git tag T O not requiring a --force if O is > already where the tag is pointing. Yup, that is essentially the idea behind that patch. > The only counter case I can really see in this is when -s is used > to allow the sign to be updated but even then, does --force really > change anything when only signing (I think not) because O does not > change. In "git tag -s T O" (or "-a" for that matter), O may not change, but the resulting tag object would certainly be different from the object that is pointed at by the existing tag reference T, due to tagger identity and the message in the tag being different from the original. So even without O changing ... > If O changes when signing, I think that --force is almost > essential to avoid messing up the signatures. ... we would require --force and that would be a good thing.