[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) writes:
> What we care about are the tag objects, those are the only kind
> that are verifiable and usable remotely.
> Now that I know we do not pull tags currently with any of the
> optimized transports, I would suggest taking the list of commit
> objects we are transporting and for each commit look in the
> remote repo/refs/tags and transferring every tag object we can find
> that refers to that commit.
I do not think it is particularly a good idea to fetch a tag
that refers to a commit when the user asks only for that commit
(e.g. the user said "the head of this remote branch I am
tracking", and the head happened to have been tagged). Yes, it
may be convenient, but retrieving the commit chain and
retrieving tags are conceptually separate issues. A tag does
not necessarily refer to a commit, so your reverse index does
not make sense for a tag pointing at a blob, for example.
I think if we have discovery mechanism of remote tags/heads, we
do not need anything else. You _could_ say something like:
$ git-list-remote --tags linux-2.6
$ git-list-remote --tags linux-2.6 |
while read sha1 tag;
git fetch linux-2.6 tag $tag
and you are done. We did not use the reverse index, nor we used
the --all-tags flag to git-fetch-script. You do not even need
git-list-remote if you are willing to wget a=summary output from
gitweb and parse the bottom of the page ;-).
The above may not exactly work for linux-2.6 repository because
I think the "tag" form of git-fetch-script may expect to find a
tag that resolves to a commit object and there is the oddball
v2.6.11-tree tag, but you got the general idea.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html