Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 10/24/2013 11:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... >> We should just lose "It is similar to using" from 10/15 and start >> over, perhaps? Add the first paragraph of the below in 10/15 and >> add the rest in 11/15, or something. >> >> --tags:: >> Request that all tags be fetched from the remote >> under the same name (i.e. `refs/tags/X` is created in >> our repository by copying their `refs/tags/X`), in >> addition to whatever is fetched by the same `git >> fetch` command without this option on the command >> line. >> + >> When `refs/tags/*` hierarchy from the remote is copied only >> because this option was given, they are not subject to be >> pruned when `--prune` option (or configuration variables >> like `fetch.prune` or `remote.<name>.prune`) is in effect. >> >> That would make it clear that they are subject to pruning when --mirror >> or an explicit refspec refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* is given, as tags are >> not fetched "only because of --tags" in such cases. > > I see your point. What do you think about the following version, which > is a bit more compact and refers the reader to --prune for the full story: > > -t:: > --tags:: > Fetch all tags from the remote (i.e., fetch remote tags > `refs/tags/*` into local tags with the same name), in addition > to whatever else would otherwise be fetched. Using this > option does not subject tags to pruning, even if --prune is > used (though tags may be pruned anyway if they are also the > destination of an explicit refspec; see '--prune'). I like the first sentence of yours better. The second sentence feels somewhat iffy, though. --tags refs/tags/*:refs/tags/* will allow tags to be pruned, so s/option does not/option alone does not/ needs to be done to be precise, at least. Thanks. -- 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