Re: Lost association between TAGS and COMMITs when rebased a git(1) repository
- From
Michael Witten <mfwitten@gmail.com>
- Date
- Sep 4, 2011, 14:38 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAMOZ1Btu=TOSqJu9uu3if_RFH6UQco+dFv-edVNoW9SauVQdmQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CA+sFfMcMgPDyCi6SCS=Sc4XFrug_Ee7vbmBBkmkwfwwpXg8yCg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 14:16, Brandon Casey <drafnel@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's true, but git is also a tool with a purpose and tags are intended to > be permanent.
Tag *objects* are intended to be permanent (like commit objects); however, don't forget about `lightweight' tags.
> A valid workflow would need to be demonstrated before such a > high-level operation as rebase made it so trivial to rewrite tags methinks.
How is it any different than doing the same with commits?
Let's say I have a private repository with an appreciable graph of commits and collection of tags, and that I want to clean up the history a bit before publishing it publicly. Well, it might save me a lot of trouble if I could use `rebase' to create an alternative history without also having to dicker around with creating the associated tags.