On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Andy Parkins wrote: > > Maybe I'm missing the point - what do people see lightweight tags as useful > for if not for marking revisions in a not-to-be-published fashion? I think that's unquestionably _one_ valid way to use them, but I don't think it's at all necessarily the only way. It's equally valid to just always use lightweight tags for everything. If you don't use the signing capability, the "real tags" (ie with a tag object) don't really buy you much anything at all apart from the message (which few enough people fill with anything relevant anyway), so why use them? And yes, signing things is certainly a good idea for releases, but there's not really any reason to do it if you're using the tag to just communicate with other people (aka "look, here is the thing I want you to merge") inside a company or group. So publishing lightweight tags makes perfect sense in that situation. I think it's probably a nicer idea to have some way to specify "don't publish" either per-remote or just generally (ie have a rule something like "refs/tags/local/" are not pushed or pulled unless explicitly asked for). Linus - 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