From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.153]) (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 BD3A710785 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2025 00:02:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763337777; cv=none; b=nS6iFCPb8Etrz/mLUtJO1X8dyRNYnhBfTlL+IOuZK/G/+UF5H/FZ/d+6wqTxo0dPFE6TMuitPx6rBptGJCmOPSMteR7aem+evGA2WDY8GI30IN9OxDV7lgpWgvEg/MCzUSOo3TQr3JRF7DUieXF65uOGA1fsQdlNUEx+FmSACxk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763337777; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oj4+Wv+/EX1lH7KJwSxAOCz4cx20j/vRhP69gFCmP6w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ED9gPyNTugybgf5TOrBKqOqb/urpTCp8zQxUf+Ok+E7kKft7l+x5pAf1rLEYC547R1It0hQijwDz3qNW6VJic2cved4QN6t2/NXKsjt6dRBrrC6RtSu7anWWFpgORMdNbVtGsMdq/m/d+Mfcg0OuDAlHB1ln9riOzBchzgxcGGw= 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=SOVP0gsn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=zvgp+S5U; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 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="SOVP0gsn"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="zvgp+S5U" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D41337A00D2; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 19:02:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 16 Nov 2025 19:02:54 -0500 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=fm2; t=1763337773; x=1763424173; bh=1cPblj00nV 7ZXp84jTxDYqO4IuguYsW2rdOZdzbr93I=; b=SOVP0gsn7L7nHafnt/K5/iiqDP L51QxoNDqDkH+YkibE5/S1Lr6xNFK3c4Ydqw7sGotm7hrIKAJlzsmNBBH1i+xSup aCgkq8Bo7aH7IfEE/sDxY22p4h983fHAMUZ+ImVjgadrV13de07xG9dvgPzr5mbr ZKSmkR10fPFE+mHE34W62NxD5vozIc4XyNYgXSnXG8Quj3q/c8EgDh3ep3tevo+c zHr4SJk0F/hrlcZ3BfcrzK7Snv3t8HMm395b69/DdoNQ7EgUkp1TbEkpGxmmbywy vD+c9HMAutSzYjio67LWXHK5tdsJUwE8LpueapZ6FoABEXiDVwpdX2ZT/quw== 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=fm3; t= 1763337773; x=1763424173; bh=1cPblj00nV7ZXp84jTxDYqO4IuguYsW2rdO Zdzbr93I=; b=zvgp+S5UNZKQZxQ6t3n8Yswv/EQacmiQ3cJ2+aHpfKEL04xiT/N 9NGxARpbT23FKKn2y5CBzbJ68f0X7fru18Ix2zrFT+2WZqSoFVE5kiOErN9Wrc7l 9+88ylPzWnzSi/QD5wK3dlNLwuYnVukykShFNsGP5Umax1gs8Dq0NV6lMPBjjxBg EoYbmYHqeoRSCHHJfSWRha0VeKEEa68YM8NZzuZ4k6AS4m0d7OtiPGmZ/K6gP0sZ p3tR5nn/dfy/9GM8NCVCaEi9jcYIRTkn1olnpt+T8dxD1/lhHq1LzkDSIAKv7r4P hoBqf7hieR+rLQIlIW88jxMmO0ElNozOFgA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggddvudeileejucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttdertdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcu vecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeufeejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeei geeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepgh hithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepiedpmhhouggvpehs mhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepkhgrrhhthhhikhdrudekkeesghhmrghilhdrtghomh dprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohep jhhlthhosghlvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrdhimh dprhgtphhtthhopeguvggsohhhmhgrnhesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehg ihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 19:02:52 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Karthik Nayak Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, jltobler@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, David Bohman Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] fetch: fix non-conflicting tags not being committed In-Reply-To: (Karthik Nayak's message of "Sat, 15 Nov 2025 22:16:28 +0000") References: <20251113-fix-tags-not-fetching-v5-0-371ea7ec638d@gmail.com> <20251113-fix-tags-not-fetching-v5-2-371ea7ec638d@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2025 16:02:51 -0800 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 Karthik Nayak writes: >> perform. Namely, we do not >> >> - call commit_fetch_head() >> >> - run set_upstream processing >> >> - honor do_set_head flag that was left for remote that does not >> have followremotehead=never >> >> but don't we want to do some of them at least? >> > > Thanks for bringing this up. I would think we should do all of these, > but not if the '--atomic' flag is used. If the '--atomic' flag is used, > we shouldn't do anything else and simply skip to the end. True. So when not "--atomic", the code with these two patches will still misbehave, but it is not a regression these two patches causes. Failing to do any of the above three when "--atomic" is not in effect is a part of original regression in the previous cycle caused by the "batched ref updates". These two patches are trying to address the regression, but these three points are not covered. Am I reading the situation correctly? > That said, we could either append this change as a new commit with some > additional tests and re-roll the series or send it as a separate commit > based on this series. I'd prefer the latter so that we have the fix for > fetching tags merged sooner, but happy to do either. Either is fine, as this won't make Git 2.52, it seems. It is OK as it is not a new regression, but it still is a recent one, and would be nice if we have something concrete to address it soon after 2.52. Thanks.