Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> The "rev" (not "revs") seems to be used by more things than the
> final commit-tree state.  Are we losing some useful information by
> peeling it too early like this patch does? (...)

You're not wrong, actually, peeling at the last minute (or at least
later) would be a better choice. I'd suggest that we aren't losing
currently-useful information (as it'd be rare-if-ever that a user would
look at a hash in their commit logs and think "Oh, that's that tag!"),
but certainly with future development in mind it's more ideal.

> I see that add_msg does not use anything useful from latest_new, so
> with the current state of the code, it does not make that much
> difference (except that it says "from commit '$latest_new'", and by
> peeling, the fact that the user wanted to use a tag is lost from the
> result).

Yeah, that might be a worthy thing to porcelain-up in the future with
logging the tag name rather than, or in addition to, the hash, as well
as a similar change in add_squashed_msg.

> Would it be sufficient to do
>         git commit-tree $tree $headp -p "$rev^0"
> in that "not squashing" codepath instead?

On line 561, sure. Do you want me to do a re-roll?
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