Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] fetch: fix non-conflicting tags not being committed

> Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> perform.  Namely, we do not
>>>
>>>  - call commit_fetch_head()
>>>
>>>  - run set_upstream processing
>>>
>>>  - honor do_set_head flag that was left for remote that does not
>>>    have followremotehead=never
>>>
>>> but don't we want to do some of them at least?
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this up. I would think we should do all of these,
>> but not if the '--atomic' flag is used. If the '--atomic' flag is used,
>> we shouldn't do anything else and simply skip to the end.
>
> True.
>
> So when not "--atomic", the code with these two patches will still
> misbehave, but it is not a regression these two patches causes.
> Failing to do any of the above three when "--atomic" is not in
> effect is a part of original regression in the previous cycle caused
> by the "batched ref updates".  These two patches are trying to
> address the regression, but these three points are not covered.  Am
> I reading the situation correctly?

>
>> That said, we could either append this change as a new commit with some
>> additional tests and re-roll the series or send it as a separate commit
>> based on this series. I'd prefer the latter so that we have the fix for
>> fetching tags merged sooner, but happy to do either.
>
> Either is fine, as this won't make Git 2.52, it seems.  It is OK as
> it is not a new regression, but it still is a recent one, and would
> be nice if we have something concrete to address it soon after 2.52.
>
> Thanks.