Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> @@ -220,6 +225,9 @@ test_commit () {
> --no-tag)
> no_tag=yes
> ;;
> + --annotated-tag)
> + annotated_tag=yes
> + ;;
A new option is welcome, but shouldn't we be straightening out the
variables that keep track of the options around tagging? It's not
like it is possible to have 4 (two variables that can independently
set to 'yes') possibilities, so something along the lines of ...
test_commit () {
+ tag=light &&
notick= &&
...
while test $# != 0
do
case "$1" in
...
--no-tag)
- no_tag=yes
+ tag=none
;;
+ --annotated)
+ tag=annotated
+ ;;
...
- if test -z "$no_tag"
- then
+ case "$tag" in
+ none)
+ ;;
+ light)
git ${indir:+ -C "$indir") tag "${4:-$1}"
+ ;;
+ annotated)
+ git ${indir:+ -C "$indir") tag -m "$1" "${4:-$1}"
+ ;;
+ esac
...
after this step (meaning, we may want to start from fixing the no_tag=yes
to tag=none before introducing this new feature).
Thanks.
> @@ -244,7 +252,15 @@ test_commit () {
> $signoff -m "$1" &&
> if test -z "$no_tag"
> then
> - git ${indir:+ -C "$indir"} tag "${4:-$1}"
> + if test -n "$annotated_tag"
> + then
> + if test -z "$notick"
> + then
> + test_tick
> + fi &&
> + test_tick
> + fi &&
> + git ${indir:+ -C "$indir"} tag ${annotated_tag:+ -a -m "$1"} "${4:-$1}"
> fi
> }
