From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0A120248 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2019 09:31:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733015AbfDDJba (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Apr 2019 05:31:30 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:33331 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732611AbfDDJba (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Apr 2019 05:31:30 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id z6so6854969wmi.0 for ; Thu, 04 Apr 2019 02:31:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=lErX7uQTVTo+Kst7VMDN9fOP+TZzOSekLWfHsogpmPA=; b=nNJF7dD0PHrWaPuFEmlpL5Gwy7+hx9wuPSPrMSC6xX0zeT5vzE0i8/ATZu3Awj/OZI 5sHfZj4eyJZlMf1kUfZOdp2tAx3fB58ViKYQgIpbrJ8LuEwaWyKQZN+kOkfr4+mrf23J 1s2eXE/aItNGpNUY1qpz/FtYQR3x6Yh214bxSyiBlYp8E4XEaipi2wf/JbI0RupuuGFU 6Y1I85nQpLT8/SBEs0LpVntkwFH+aIlnWjeaiK83oa/RrQTrU7Ek2EfFdSYhxgP5d071 RjN8oVV0LmvCoH/miiZbOY88Xy1r25ncnh3SULh1vba8q9rpaKt51ToRFJfQ4R4yg23H t3lg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=lErX7uQTVTo+Kst7VMDN9fOP+TZzOSekLWfHsogpmPA=; b=hIBNHmyuZlCxG4kDwKIGSmJ0g9vAJFcT/D6jFIxxmAV/45vkKrfS8bzUoC2d/7XLZy 5fZOG9fWN8PHu2NhP+zw/SfA7gpmIHH14EfqbHGebDA+6Xq0pCETkTZAjzlicEMwllpD l0XbMnsTJ+c3U0xbrtvR8ShFqbRT4bsxba/zgKKyDqrGO1q+zYjKeagVJ7BAbQrAdcyF 1bm5dLRhVaF51LV3ldJ0BbenR8lc5qi7tf8tYoqnVPPSCV7jGE2GRW/TT7+tOXZu5Mcw 9+L+uUVCuCy3HnD2ju91C/dXdG/BDD3vsHgr5HdG5EsH/6IzAwKPG5wWrUrCp//Chqnj jbCw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVfKUVOS6kN218ROVJKCiFLhIhs99MODssKy6vURg209kqD6syB WVKHIRREAOzOB1QyuMWVQZg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz4aDMibzRvlHlik+M3j0T9xFMk55pir2JvqYKJ7jKmPccvaQeG9UHYnxCFVrhJ+TREj9Rs7w== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:cbd6:: with SMTP id n22mr3531858wmi.57.1554370287814; Thu, 04 Apr 2019 02:31:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (141.255.76.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.76.255.141]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o17sm19218249wrw.73.2019.04.04.02.31.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 04 Apr 2019 02:31:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Denton Liu , Git Mailing List , Robert Dailey , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2.5 2/2] tag: prevent nested tags References: <1bd9ee28bc8726490ec0a93286056beeb147fc49.1554183429.git.liu.denton@gmail.com> <20190402230345.GA5004@dev-l> <20190403213318.GA14137@dev-l> <20190404020226.GG4409@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 18:31:25 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20190404020226.GG4409@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 3 Apr 2019 22:02:26 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I do still think it is likely to be a mistake. I think Junio's point, > though is: who cares if the mistake was made? For the most part you can > continue to use the tag as if the mistake had never been made, because > Git peels through multiple layers as necessary. Nicely said. If we forget to peel, that is a bigger problem, but I do not think it makes any sense to single out tag-of-tag as "curious" and forbid it, when we silently allow tag-of-blob or tag-of-tree happily. An opt-in (i.e. default to false) tag.allowTaggingOnlyCommits I do not have any problem with, and I could be persuaded into taking an opt-out (i.e. default to true) tag.forbidTaggingAnythingButCommits configuration, perhaps, though.