Junio C Hamano <gitster <at> pobox.com> writes: > > Junio C Hamano <gitster <at> pobox.com> writes: > > > Brandon Casey <casey <at> nrlssc.navy.mil> writes: > > ... > >> I expect these to _not_ fetch tags (and they don't): > >> > >> git fetch <repo> <branch> > >> git pull <repo> <branch> > >> > >> But, I did not expect these to fetch tags: > >> > >> git fetch <repo> <branch>:<branch> > >> git pull <repo> <branch>:<branch> > > > > Sigh... that matches my expectation. > > > > Did we break it when we overhauled "git fetch", or was this an > > independent "improvement" that happened long before that? > > Having said that, I do not particularly think the new behaviour > is bad per-se. If you are storing what you fetched locally in > tracking branches, you are interested in their work enough to > want to auto-follow their tags. How is "tracking" defined? Is this a term that implies some configuration to link a local branch to a remote branch? Or is any local branch created from a remote branch considered "tracking"? I thought that a tracking branch needed some setup like what the --track option to git-branch or git-checkout would do. If setup is required, then it implies some permanence to the branch and for the link between the branch and the remote. In this case I agree you would want to auto-follow tags. -brandon - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
