- Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 07:21:31 -0500
- From: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Fetch-hooks
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 01:37:20AM +0100, Leo Gaspard wrote:
> > Yeah, tag-following may be a little tricky, because it usually wants to
> > write to refs/tags/. One workaround would be to have your config look
> > like this:
> > [remote "origin"]
> > fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/quarantine/origin/heads/*
> > fetch = +refs/tags/*:refs/quarantine/origin/tags/*
> > tagOpt = --no-tags
> > That's not exactly the same thing, because it would fetch all tags, not
> > just those that point to the history on the branches. But in most
> > repositories and workflows the distinction doesn't matter.
> Hmm... apart from the implementation complexity (of which I have no
> idea), is there an argument against the idea of adding a
> remote.<name>.fetchTagsTo refmap similar to remote.<name>.fetch but used
> every time a tag is fetched? (well, maybe not exactly similar to
> remote.<name>.fetch because we know the source is going to be
> refs/tags/*; so just having the part of .fetch past the ':' would be
> more like what's needed I guess)
I don't think it would be too hard to implement, and is at least
logically consistent with the way we handle tags.
If we were designing from scratch, I do think this would all be helped
immensely by having more separation of refs fetched from remotes. There
was a proposal in the v1.8 era to fetch everything for a remote,
including tags, into "refs/remotes/origin/heads/",
"refs/remotes/origin/tags/", etc. And then we'd teach the lookup side to
look for tags in each of the remote-tag namespaces.
I still think that would be a good direction to go, but it would be a
big project (which is why the original stalled).
> The issue with your solution is that if the user runs 'git fetch
> --tags', he will get the (potentially compromised) tags directly in his