René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> writes: > Anyway, we can of course do something like in the patch below. It > works, it's easy, it's fast enough for git archive, and it's quite > hideous. Hopefully it's bad enough to motivate someone to come up with > a cleaner, faster solution. Yeah, I can see it would work, it is no-brainer-easy, it is clean, and I can believe it would be fast enough and overall, the best implementation for the purpose of "git archive". Perhaps not for "log", but then I do not know if there is a good way to have it natively run inside "log" without major surgery, as the "describe" operation itself is fairly resource intensive to remember which tagged commit is the closest to compute description for even a single commit.
