Greg Price <> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:20:07PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Without "--all" the command considers only the annotated tags to
>> base the descripion on, and with "--all", a ref that is not
>> annotated tags can be used as a base, but with a lower priority (if
>> an annotated tag can describe a given commit, that tag is used).
>> So naïvely I would expect "--all" and "--match" to base the
>> description on refs that match the pattern without limiting the
>> choice of base to annotated tags, and refs that do not match the
>> given pattern should not appear even as the last resort.  It appears
>> to me that the current situation is (3).
> Hmm.  It seems to me that "--all" says two things:
>  (a) allow unannotated (rather than only annotated)
>  (b) allow refs of any name (rather than only tags)
> With "--match", particularly because the pattern always refers only to
> tags, (b) is obliterated, and your proposed semantics are (a) plus a
> sort of inverse of (b):
>  (c) allow only refs matching the pattern

I would think it is more like "only (a), without changing the
documented semantics of what '--all' and '--match' are by adding (b)
or (c)".

I do not think in the longer term it is wrong per-se to change the
semantics of "--match" from the documented "Only consider tags
matching the pattern" to "Only consider refs matching the pattern",
and such a change can and should be made as a separate patch
"describe: loosen --match to allow any ref, not just tags" on top of
the patch I sent which was meant to be bugfix-only.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to