Greg Price <price@xxxxxxx> 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 majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html