Re: [Feature Request] Better Subversion integration

From: Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>
Date: Feb 15, 2008, 22:38 UTC
Message-ID: <20080215223817.GA13178@efreet.light.src>
In-Reply-To: <20080211084704.GB20741@albany.tokkee.org>

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:47:04 +0100, Sebastian Harl wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 04:56:11AM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> > SVN tags aren't like git tags. A "tag" in SVN is just another directory,
> > which you can modify at will.
>
> Well, a SVN tag could be represented as a Git branch _and_ a Git tag
> pointing to the head of that branch. Whenever any such "tag branch"
> advances, the user should be notified, the user responsible for the
> further commits to the SVN "tag" should be seriously hurt and the Git
> tag should be overwritten (git tag -f).

There's no need to have a Git _branch_ together with the tag -- tag is also a ref.

For the rest, the user definitely has to be notified, because git push will _not_ push out the updated tag if the previous version of it was already pushed. So the user will have to deal with that manually.

If there was to be a support for tags in git-svn, I would actually suggest to simply make the name mapping more flexible and simply say, that branches in tags/ should be imported to refs/tags (while the rest going to refs/remotes/svn). You see, subversion tags are not annotated (so they don't need special handling) and git-update-ref will update tags just fine.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>