From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: git-pull and tag objects Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:34:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <1170933407.15431.38.camel@okra.transitives.com> <81b0412b0702090133qa4eb0c0v6a2d309fe9653a3f@mail.gmail.com> <7v4ppurka1.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070210142322.GB25607@thunk.org> <7vy7n5gs0y.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070212162745.GB2741@thunk.org> <7vr6su1szp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 15 02:34:29 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HHVW1-0007Mr-9g for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 02:34:29 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751526AbXBOBeM (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:34:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751517AbXBOBeM (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:34:12 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:32873 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751515AbXBOBeK (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:34:10 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Feb 2007 01:34:08 -0000 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+PZx9Mr2WPn7rZLOgxALMYksxtwO2Y3jgGL8sHyl ql5w== X-X-Sender: gene099@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de In-Reply-To: X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, [*SIGH* I am Cc'ing Linus, since you -- again -- forgot that] On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > One thing that _might_ be a good idea for tags (if people _really_ > > want to actually update tags under the same name) is to have a > > "parent" pointer for tag objects, the same way we have for commits. > > That way you could - if you really wanted to - create a chain of tags, > > and show the history of them. > > Wouldn't it be better to just use reflog for given tag? That assuming of > course that we could protect tag reflog from pruning... No. Reflogs are a local thing, tags not necessarily. And much fun "pushing" a reflog to another repo. Ciao, Dscho