On 02/06/2017 12:25 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> cornelius.weig@xxxxxxxxxxx writes
> For a tag, I would imagine something like "tag: tagged 4e59582ff7
> ("Seventh batch for 2.12", 2017-01-23)" would be more appropriate.
Yes, I agree that this is much clearer. The revised version v3
implements this behavior.
>> Notes:
>> While playing around with tag reflogs I also found a bug that was present
>> before this patch. It manifests itself when the sha1-ref in the reflog does not
>> point to a commit object but something else.
>
> I think the fix would involve first ripping out the "reflog walking"
> code that was bolted on and stop allowing it to inject the entries
> taken from the reflog into the "walk the commit DAG" machinery.
> Then "reflog walking" code needs to be taught to have its own "now
> we got a single object to show, show it (using the helper functions
> to show a single object that is already used by 'git show')" code,
> instead of piggy-backing on the output codepath used by "log" and
> "rev-list".
I'll start investigating how that could be done. My first glance tells
me that it won't be easy. Especially because I'm not yet familiar with
the git code.
Thanks for your advice!