Re: [PATCH] Proof-of-concept patch to remember what the detached HEAD was

From: Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
Date: Oct 17, 2009, 22:28 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0910172320060.9794@reaper.quantumfyre.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20091017174843.GA16251@atjola.homenet>

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Bj?rn Steinbrink wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On 2009.10.17 18:35:38 +0100, Julian Phillips wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Bj?rn Steinbrink wrote:
>>> Do you have multiple (annotated) tags for the same commit?
>>
>> Potentially, yes.  Releasing isn't the only thing that requires
>> keeping track of things.  It's even possible that the person
>> creating the newer tag doesn't yet know that a release tag has been
>> applied if the person who applied it hasn't yet pushed it back.
>
> OK, I'd consider that namespace pollution, as things like
> "this-version-sucks" doesn't seem like it show go into public repos, but
> anyway. If your release tags fix into a certain "unique" format, you
> could use describe with --match, like:
> git describe --match 'v[0-9]*'

Well - that only helps if we only ever build the release tags. Which isn't the case. The other tags are there for similar purposes and also should go into the version string - but only when they were the tag checked out.

Is it really that unreasonable to want to know exactly what it was that was checked out? It's one of the few things that I miss from Subversion.

-- 
Julian

  ---
printk(KERN_INFO MYNAM ": English readable SCSI-3 strings enabled :-)\n");
         linux-2.6.6/drivers/message/fusion/mptbase.c