"Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> That's interesting, I hadn't noticed name-rev before you and Shawn >> mentioned it. >> >> It only finds one name, though. When I tried it just now on my >> repository what it found was a tag I'd created for an experimental >> version, which probably wouldn't be what I wanted. (Though it might be, >> in some situations.) > > Yea. Hmm. Maybe name-rev needs to learn a few more tricks, like > favoring annotated tags over non-annotated ones/heads, and being > able to print the top n nearest matches (e.g. 10), by displaying > only one line of output per tag (or ref). Yeah, I found name-rev to be mostly useless since it almost always names relative to my unannotated "anchor" tag that I use to keep track of 'master' I sent the last "What's in" message for. I think doing parallel merge-base computation that is in show-branch and the updated describe would be a sensible approach. When somebody says such and such does not work yet in his version, after identifying the commit that introduced that feature, I would run "show-branch $that_rev 'tags/v1.*'" to see which tag(s) contain that revision. - 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