Re: [PATCH] Teach git-describe --long to output always the long format

From: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 25, 2008, 09:05 UTC
Message-ID: <8aa486160802250105p4f98cb6eu1d6ac4fa700f11fe@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vbq65ju0y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 25 quoted lines

> "Santi Béjar" <sbejar@gmail.com> writes:
>
>  > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 4:08 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>  >> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>  >> ...
>
> >>  > Is this really that useful?  Where is having the tag and the commit
>  >>  > SHA-1 both useful?
>  >>
>  >>  I had the same question.  The only place that I find this could
>  >>  be useful is when you tag, build and install, and then find
>  >>  glitches before pushing the results out and rewind, rebuild and
>  >>  re-tag.  I unfortunately have this issue almost all the time.
>  >>
>  >>  But even then, I would probably not rely on this patch.
>  >
>  > This can be usefull when more than one person can make "official" tags
>  > (or nobody), and then you have a uniqe idendifier with a descriptive
>  > name.
>
>  That's backwards.  If you want reliable unique identifier, you
>  would use 40-hexdigit.  If you want human readable, you would
>  use tags, and if you allow different people to distribute tags
>  with the same name that point at different things, _you_ have a
>  problem at higher level.

Yes, I have a "problem" at a higher level, but I cannot "solve" it. This patch "workaround" this "problem", we want all to be able to tag and have descriptive and uniqe names. I think git should allows us to work this way.

Santi