On Sun, Jul 07, 2013 at 03:33:44PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > With this on top of the other patches in this series, you would get: > > $ git describe --contains $(git rev-parse v1.8.3 v1.8.3^0) > v1.8.3 > v1.8.3 > > while you can still differentiate tags and the commits they point at > with: > > $ git name-rev --refs=tags/\* --name-only $(git rev-parse v1.8.3 v1.8.3^0) > v1.8.3 > v1.8.3^0 > > The difference in these two behaviours is achieved by adding --peel-to-commit > option to "name-rev" and using it when "describe" internally calls it.
I am somewhat mixed on this. You are changing the default behavior of name-rev and adding a new option to restore it, so I wonder who (if anyone) might be broken. The documentation is now also out of date; not only does it not mention "peel-to-commit", but it claims the argument to name-rev is a committish, which is not really true without that option. On the other hand, the new default behavior seems way more sane to me. In general, I would expect name-rev to: 1. Behave more or less the same between "git name-rev $sha1" and "echo $sha1 | git name-rev --stdin". Your patch improves that. Though I note that --peel-to-commit does not affect --stdin at all. Should it? And of course the two differ in that the command line will take any rev-parse expression, and --stdin only looks for full sha1s. 2. If name-rev prints "$X $Y", I would expect "git rev-parse $X" to equal "git rev-parse $Y". With peeling, that is not the case, and you get the misleading example that Ram showed: $ git name-rev 8af0605 8af0605 tags/v1.8.3^0 or more obviously weird: $ git name-rev v1.8.3 v1.8.3 tags/v1.8.3^0 So I think your series moves in a good direction, but I would just worry that it is breaking backwards compatibility (but like I said, I am not clear on who is affected and what it means for them). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html