On 13-09-24 03:51 AM, Jeff King wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 08:42:26AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:

I think it would be preferable if "--prune" would *not* affect tags, and
if there were an extra option like "--prune-tags" that would have to be
used explicitly to cause tags to be pruned.  Would somebody object to
such a change?

I think most of this problem is the way that we fetch tags straight into
the refs/tags hierarchy. You would not do:

   [remote "origin"]
   fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/heads/*
   prune = true

unless you wanted to be a pure-mirror, because you would hose your local
changes any time you fetched. But that is _exactly_ what we do with a
refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* fetch.

If we instead moved to a default fetch refspec more like:

   [remote "origin"]
   fetch = +refs/*:refs/remotes/origin/refs/*

I'm all for such a change.

You no doubt recall the lengthy discussion about remote ref namespaces back in 2011 [1]. That arose while planning for 1.8, but my feeble recollection is that the change was considered too disruptive. It seems 2.0 would be a better home for such work.


[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/165799/focus=166729

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

Reply via email to