Re: Annotated branch ≈ annotated tag?

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sep 29, 2011, 06:44 UTC
Message-ID: <20110929064404.GA14022@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <4E82A13B.2080509@alum.mit.edu>

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 06:23:23AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> It seems to me that an annotated branch is very much like an (unsigned)
> annotated tag, except that it is movable and disposable like a normal
> branch.  What would be the ramifications of using an annotated-tag-like
> object to record metainformation about a branch?  (Let's just call it an
> "annotation object" for this discussion.)
> 
> * The branch would point not at a commit but at an annotation object
> that points at a commit.
> 
> * Obviously, a new annotation object would have to be written every time
> the branch is updated.

Leaving aside for a moment whether this is a good system or not, I think it's infeasible at this point simply because it is so far from what current git does, and in such a visible way.

Consider the interactions between this system and older versions of git. Won't all of the older clients see this annotation cruft at the tip of each branch? How will they react? It would no longer be correct to make commits with "git commit-tree $tree `git rev-parse HEAD`", would it?

-Peff