Re: [RFC/PATCH] refs: tone down the dwimmery in refname_match() for {heads,tags,remotes}/*

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 27/05/19 17:39, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I do not think lightweight vs annotated should be the issue.  The
> tag that the requestor asks to be pulled (from repository ../b)
> should be what the requestor has locally when writing the request
> (in repository .).  Even if both tags at remote and local are
> annotated, we should still warn if they are different objects, no?

Right, lightweight vs annotated then is the obvious special case where
one of the two is a commit and the other is a tag, hence they ought not
to have the same SHA1.  I'll take a look.

Paolo



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux