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, 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 B3BD720248 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 23:36:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728912AbfCYXgr (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:36:47 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:35924 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726061AbfCYXgr (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:36:47 -0400 Received: (qmail 5580 invoked by uid 109); 25 Mar 2019 23:36:47 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 23:36:47 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 13455 invoked by uid 111); 25 Mar 2019 23:37:10 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:37:10 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:36:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 19:36:45 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Bryan Turner Cc: Robert Dailey , Git Subject: Re: Strange annotated tag issue Message-ID: <20190325233644.GC23728@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20190321192928.GA19427@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20190325144930.GA19929@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 11:43:52AM -0700, Bryan Turner wrote: > > I don't think I've ever seen a tag-to-a-tag in the wild, but I wouldn't > > be surprised if somebody has found a use for it. For example, because > > tags can be signed, I can make a signature of your signature, showing a > > cryptographic chain of custody. > > For a while the Atlassian Bamboo team followed a workflow where they > would do a build in CI, tag that build and then deploy it to a sandbox > environment for smoke testing. If it passed the smoke tests, it would > get "promoted" from the sandbox environment to internal instances used > by the various teams to do their builds. When a sandbox build was > "promoted", they'd create a tag of the sandbox build's tag to have > traceability between the two environments. > > I'm not advocating for or judging that workflow one way or another, > and the Bamboo team has since moved on to a different workflow. I just > thought I'd share it as a tag-of-tag workflow that I've seen a real > team using. (There was one place in Bitbucket Server's code where we > didn't handle recursive tags correctly, so their workflow caused some > errors that I needed to make some adjustments for. As a result, > Bitbucket Server's test suite now includes tests that cover tag-of-tag > behaviors.) Thanks, I always like hearing these kinds of data points. If nothing else, it's a good reminder that if Git has behaved some way for many years, then _somebody_ is likely to have taken advantage of it, whether we considered it a possibility or not. :) -Peff