On Donnerstag, 29. November 2007, Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > Thomas Koeller wrote: > > The commit is of course present in both trees. AFAIK the > > 'cannot describe' error shows if there are no tags at all, > > but this is not the case; .git/refs/tags is fully populated. > > Not really, it can happen if the commit you're trying to describe and > all of its parents are not tagged. Yes, that is what I meant to say. > Is the commit originally part of Linus' tree and was pulled later by > Ralf ? Indeed. > > If so, it probably means that the commits committed by Ralf in his > tree, which are the tagged ones, have no relationship with the ones > pulled from Linus. So far it has been my understanding that if I pull from a remote repository, all the commits are merged into the target branch, resulting in a combined history containing all my commits as well as those pulled. This means that as long as any (locally created or pulled) commit preceeding the one that git-describe is applied to is tagged, I would expect git-describe to find that tag. This seems to be a misconception, then? Thomas -- Thomas Koeller thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
