Re: [PATCH] GIT-VERSION-GEN: Do not require tags to be annotated

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sep 7, 2013, 16:10 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqsixgvci1.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHGBnuP6w8rvoz+h2Xase1ApY_kpZh4X=VF6LY4O0r7RS0UayA@mail.gmail.com>

Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>> For custom builds of Git it sometimes is inconvenient to annotate tags
>>> because there simply is nothing to say, so do not require an annotation.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> Hmmmm, personally I'd actually want this to stay the way it is, or
>> even require a valid signed tag, in order to make sure I won't
>> mistakenly creating a lightweight tag.

I do not mind taking the patch after all, after thinking about it a bit more.

See later part of the message for this.

Show 8 quoted lines

>> If you want to give build a custom name,
>>
>>     echo buildname >version
>>
>> should be sufficient, no?
>
> That's not sufficient if you care about a proper (automated) release
> workflow with your releases tagged.

I take the above "your" does not refer to "mine, Junio's".

I am not sure what you mean by automated, but if you can tell your automation infrastructure that the way to build this Git software is to run "make" in it, shouldn't it be trivial to instead tell it to run something like this instead?

	git describe --tags HEAD >version && make

Or are these tags you want G-V-G to use also droppings of the automated process? That is, what you tell the automation infrastructure is to run something like this?

	git tag build-$(date +"%Y-%m-%d") && make

If that is the case, it would be sufficient to tweak that to leave the same information in >version file and you do not lose any automation.

So I do not understand the above "not sufficient if you care about" comment at all.

Having said all that.

I do not think the current use of "describe" helps the builder to avoid making a light-weight tag by mistake anyway, as it would be very natural to update DEF_VER to a matching string. In a month or so, I am sure I'd update that line to v1.8.5 before I make a tag with the same name, and it does not matter if the current use of "describe" skipped a mistakenly-made lightweight v1.8.5 tag when deciding the embedded version string---the end result will get the same string from DEF_VER and running "git version" with the built binary will happily show v1.8.5 the same way.

I am however still curious what kind of other tags (either signed, annotated, or lightweight) you are using for this purpose. Is there a case where you have your own tag that points at the exact version as I tagged? In such a case, do you have a preference on which tag do you want GIT-VERSION-GEN to use?