On Wednesday 14. September 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:03 AM, Matthieu Moy > > <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Would the notes mechanism be able to annotate ref names instead of > > commit sha1? > > That would be a horrible, horrible notion. > > It's quite common to have multiple branches with the same SHA1. It > might be in the "experimental-development" branch, but it got through > testing with flying colors and deemed to be stable, so it got > upgraded to the "for-linus" branch, and there hasn't been any other > development since. So now both "for-linus" and > "experimental-development" are the same commit, but they are very > much not the same branch! > > So no, don't confuse branch *contents* with branch *descriptions*. I don't think the suggestion was about annotating the branch tip as a way of describing the branch. Rather, you create a _new_ SHA1 that identifies the branch (e.g. SHA1(branch_name) ), and then annotate _that_ SHA1. As I said, that _can_ be done with the notes infrastructure, but - as Ted noted - there might be better solutions to storing branch descriptions. ...Johan -- Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> www.herland.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html