Re: Pulling tags from git.git
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Mar 8, 2006, 10:13 UTC
- Message-ID
- <440EAE34.5020807@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <440E5E40.7090700@gmail.com>
A Large Angry SCM wrote:
> > Why is a "pull" bothering with tags? A "fetch" yes, but not a pull. >
A pull is a fetch + merge. I said pull because what little I know of Linus' workflow is the the emails he gets from susbsystem maintainers are called "pull requests".
Show 17 quoted lines
>> >> Tags not meant to be distributed are unannotated, and unannotated tags >> are kept out of published repos which are always stored at a central >> server. Everybody synchronize to those central repos, so nobody pulls >> from each other. Perhaps this is how the kernel devs work too, but if >> it ever changes the update hook will no longer be able to safeguard >> from it and the, in my eyes, temporary tags will be distributed in a >> criss-crossing mesh so no-one will ever know where it came from or who >> created it or why. I.e. a Bad Thing. > > > The distinction here is not annotated tags or temporary tags but _local_ > tags. _Your_ workflow conventions treat unannotated tags as local tags > but declaring that unannotated tags can not be pushed is imposing _your_ > conventions on other groups. Just as branch names, themselves, can be > meaningful, so can tag names. >
Yes, that's why I said it's better to discourage than to disallow. The default update-hook is disabled by default and there are comments aplenty to make it possible even for the most die-hard point-and-click monkey to be able to comment out the disallowing of unannotated tags.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231