On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Santi Béjar" <sbejar@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 4:08 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> ... > > >> > Is this really that useful? Where is having the tag and the commit > >> > SHA-1 both useful? > >> > >> I had the same question. The only place that I find this could > >> be useful is when you tag, build and install, and then find > >> glitches before pushing the results out and rewind, rebuild and > >> re-tag. I unfortunately have this issue almost all the time. > >> > >> But even then, I would probably not rely on this patch. > > > > This can be usefull when more than one person can make "official" tags > > (or nobody), and then you have a uniqe idendifier with a descriptive > > name. > > That's backwards. If you want reliable unique identifier, you > would use 40-hexdigit. If you want human readable, you would > use tags, and if you allow different people to distribute tags > with the same name that point at different things, _you_ have a > problem at higher level. Yes, I have a "problem" at a higher level, but I cannot "solve" it. This patch "workaround" this "problem", we want all to be able to tag and have descriptive and uniqe names. I think git should allows us to work this way. Santi - 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
