threads / patch / 38697

patch, 2 partsdocs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

Subject: [PATCH 2/2] docs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

## tl;dr

4 messages between Mar 3, 2015 and Mar 4, 2015. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 3people: 2as markdown or json

Kevin Daudt· Mar 3, 2015, 23:11 UTC · lore

[PATCH 1/2] docs: explain behaviour with no tagopt set

Currently, only the behaviour when this option is set is explained, but it's unclear what happens when this option hasn't been set.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <me@ikke.info>
---
 Documentation/config.txt | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Show changes to Documentation/config.txt +3 −2
diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
index 440784c..394042a 100644
--- a/Documentation/config.txt
+++ b/Documentation/config.txt
@@ -2241,8 +2241,9 @@ remote.<name>.tagopt::
 	Setting this value to \--no-tags disables automatic tag following when
 	fetching from remote <name>. Setting it to \--tags will fetch every
 	tag from remote <name>, even if they are not reachable from remote
-	branch heads. Passing these flags directly to linkgit:git-fetch[1] can
-	override this setting. See options \--tags and \--no-tags of
+	branch heads. When not set, fetches only tags reachable by the
+	downloaded refs. Passing these flags directly to linkgit:git-fetch[1]
+	can override this setting. See options \--tags and \--no-tags of
 	linkgit:git-fetch[1].
 
 remote.<name>.vcs::
-- 
2.3.0
Kevin Daudt· Mar 3, 2015, 23:12 UTC · re: Kevin Daudt · lore

Only behaviour with these options are currently explained. Add explanation what the default behaviour is.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <me@ikke.info>
---
 Documentation/git-remote.txt | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Show changes to Documentation/git-remote.txt +3 −0
diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote.txt b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
index a77607b..5bde0e1 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-remote.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
@@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ remote repository.
 With `--no-tags` option, `git fetch <name>` does not import tags from
 the remote repository.
 +
+With neither `--tags` or `--no-tags` set, imports only tags that are
+reachable from downloaded history.
++
 With `-t <branch>` option, instead of the default glob
 refspec for the remote to track all branches under
 the `refs/remotes/<name>/` namespace, a refspec to track only `<branch>`
-- 
2.3.0
Michael J Gruber· Mar 4, 2015, 15:46 UTC · re: Kevin Daudt · lore

Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

Kevin Daudt venit, vidit, dixit 04.03.2015 00:12:
Show 23 quoted lines
> Only behaviour with these options are currently explained. Add
> explanation what the default behaviour is.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Daudt <me@ikke.info>
> ---
>  Documentation/git-remote.txt | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote.txt b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
> index a77607b..5bde0e1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/git-remote.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
> @@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ remote repository.
>  With `--no-tags` option, `git fetch <name>` does not import tags from
>  the remote repository.
>  +
> +With neither `--tags` or `--no-tags` set, imports only tags that are
> +reachable from downloaded history.
> ++
>  With `-t <branch>` option, instead of the default glob
>  refspec for the remote to track all branches under
>  the `refs/remotes/<name>/` namespace, a refspec to track only `<branch>`
> 
So, how does this relate to:
http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/264592

I don't mind you taking this over at all, it's just that we should keep things together where the discussion begun.

Michael
Kevin Daudt· Mar 4, 2015, 16:47 UTC · re: Michael J Gruber · lore

Re: [PATCH 2/2] docs: explain behaviour of remote add without tag option

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 04:46:47PM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> 
> So, how does this relate to:
> 
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/264592
> 
> I don't mind you taking this over at all, it's just that we should keep
> things together where the discussion begun.
> 
> Michael

Sorry, I totally missed that. Wasn't my goal to take it over. I have a filter to seperate out patches from other e-mail, so the thread got separated.

← back to recent threads