Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I.e. the non-refs/{tags,heads}/* update logic treats all updates to
> tags/commits as branch updates. We just look at the tag v2.18.0, see you
> want to replace it with the commit v2.19.0-rc0^{} and see "oh, that's a
> fast-forward".
In my old message you are responding to, I asked what you meant by
"will be treated as branches", and after seeing "as branch updates"
above, I think I know what you want the phrase to mean, namely, that
old-to-new transition requires new to be a descendant of old. But I
think that is weaker than what other people (including me) thinks of
rules to update refs/heads/* hierarchy (i.e. "branch update").
You are allowing to store an object that is not a commit in
refs/blah/my-tag in your example, so it clearly does not protect the
ref with an extra rule that applies to "branches", namely, "it has
to be a commit."
> Arguably that should be changed, but I won't do that in this series.
OK.
