threads / discuss / 2347
Subject: Tags not transferred with git pull?
Hi,
Is it OK that the latest git (0.99.9c) doesn't get the tags (refs/tags/*) when doing a git pull? It's getting a bit of a nuisance to do a separate rsync to get them right.
Erik
-- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands | Data lost? Stay calm and contact Harddisk-recovery.com
Jan HarkesRe: Tags not transferred with git pull?
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:53:14PM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote:
> Is it OK that the latest git (0.99.9c) doesn't get the tags > (refs/tags/*) when doing a git pull? It's getting a bit of a nuisance > to do a separate rsync to get them right.
You don't need to fall back on rsync,
git fetch --tags
Jan
Fernando J. PeredaRe: Tags not transferred with git pull?
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:53:14PM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote: | Hi, | | Is it OK that the latest git (0.99.9c) doesn't get the tags | (refs/tags/*) when doing a git pull? It's getting a bit of a nuisance | to do a separate rsync to get them right. |
As Linus explained in a message earlier, a git fetch --tags will do it.
Cheers, Ferdy
-- Fernando J. Pereda Garcimart�n Gentoo Developer (Alpha,net-mail,mutt,git) 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4
Re: Tags not transferred with git pull?
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:59:14PM +0100, Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 04:53:14PM +0100, Erik Mouw wrote: > | Is it OK that the latest git (0.99.9c) doesn't get the tags > | (refs/tags/*) when doing a git pull? It's getting a bit of a nuisance > | to do a separate rsync to get them right. > > As Linus explained in a message earlier, a git fetch --tags will do it.
Ah, right. I got the impression that the latest git was supposed to do that automatically with a git pull.
Erik
-- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands
Junio C HamanoRe: Tags not transferred with git pull?
Erik Mouw <erik@harddisk-recovery.com> writes:
> Ah, right. I got the impression that the latest git was supposed to do > that automatically with a git pull.
Sorry for the confusion. The barebone Porcelainish shipped with git-core does not fetch and store tags unconditionally under the same name as the remote has without being told; you need to explicitly tell it to 'git fetch --tags'.
What was added recently was a low level support for Cogito to implement the automatic tracking. This is supposed to (I do not offhand know if the Cogito side has been updated to do so already) work a bit differently. Instead of grabbing all tags and all objects reachable from them, as you fetch commits from the remote, the automatic tracking fetches tags that point at them. What this means is that the tags on the remote branch you are tracking would be fetched automatically but tags on a remote branch you are not interested in are not.
Re: Tags not transferred with git pull?
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 11:26:20AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Sorry for the confusion. The barebone Porcelainish shipped with > git-core does not fetch and store tags unconditionally under the > same name as the remote has without being told; you need to > explicitly tell it to 'git fetch --tags'. > > What was added recently was a low level support for Cogito to > implement the automatic tracking. This is supposed to (I do not > offhand know if the Cogito side has been updated to do so > already) work a bit differently. Instead of grabbing all tags > and all objects reachable from them, as you fetch commits from > the remote, the automatic tracking fetches tags that point at > them. What this means is that the tags on the remote branch you > are tracking would be fetched automatically but tags on a remote > branch you are not interested in are not.
Thanks for the explanation.
Erik
-- +-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 -- | Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands