Re: Feature Request: Passing a number as an option to git tags for displaying latest tags

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 23, 2015, 18:21 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq8ua6pwek.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+P7+xpy86GMmdtcag4kaxDrB4TrdeQYraabNS0pASdBG+P+OQ@mail.gmail.com>

Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:

Show 24 quoted lines

> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Yep, that's pretty much how a build system I've had to use does it.
>>> Sadly, this is quite slow, and I'm not sure if doing it built into the
>>> tag via for-each-ref would be faster?
>>
>> Is the description in "git for-each-ref --help" somehow unreadable?
>> ...
>> If you only need the name of the ref, you can use a lot simpler
>> format string, e.g.
>>
>>     git for-each-ref --count=3 --sort='-*authordate' \
>>       --format='%(refname:short)' refs/tags
>>
>>     git for-each-ref --count=3 --sort='-taggerdate' \
>>       --format='%(refname:short)' refs/tags
>>
>
> That's significantly better than what this system does, but sadly the
> team that owns it doesn't exactly understand git. Pretty sure they
> tend to just use whatever scriptlet they got working, which happens to
> be based on log...  I've tried to help them, but generally hasn't been
> a successful relationship there.

If your build people refuse to switch from an unreliable way of parsing "log" output that is not meant for machine consumption, then it wouldn't make any difference what the answer to your "I'm not sure if doing it built into ... be faster?" X-<.

By the way, I was referring to that question, pointing out that you do not have be wondering. It is already there, and as I said a few messages ago already in this thread, the cross-pollination among "for-each-ref", "branch -l" and "tag -l" is happening as part of this year's GSoC program.