On 10/31/2011 03:18 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> It certainly lets you run "git tag --verify" after you pulled and will >> give you assurance that you pulled the right thing from the right person, >> but what do you plan to do to the tag from your lieutenants after you >> fetched and verified? I count 379 merges by you between 3.0 (2011-07-21) >> and 3.1 (2011-10-24), which would mean you would see 4-5 tags per day on >> average. Will these tags be pushed out to your public history? > > No, you misunderstand. > > I can do that kind of "crazy manual check of a tag" today. And it's > too painful to be useful in the long run (or even the short run - I'd > much prefer the pgp signature in the email which is easier to check > and more visible anyway). Fetching a tag by name and saving it as a > tag is indeed pointless. > > But what would be nice is that "git pull" would fetch the tag (based > on name) *automatically*, and not actually create a tag in my > repository at all. Instead, if would use the tag to check the > signature, and - if we do this right - also use the tag contents to > populate the merge commit message. > > In other words, no actual tag would ever be left around as a turd, it > would simply be used as an automatic communication channel between the > "git push -s" of the submitter and my subsequent "git pull". Neither > side would have to do anything special, and the tag would never show > up in any relevant tree (it could even be in a totally separate > namespace like "refs/pullmarker/<branchname>" or something). > Perhaps we should introduce the notion of a "private tag" or something along those lines? (I guess that would still have to be possible to push it, but not pull it by default...) -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
