Subject: Re: [Feature Request] Better Subversion integration

From: Jan Hudec <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 23:38:17 +0100

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:47:04 +0100, Sebastian Harl wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2008 at 04:56:11AM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote:
> > SVN tags aren't like git tags. A "tag" in SVN is just another directory,
> > which you can modify at will.
>
> Well, a SVN tag could be represented as a Git branch _and_ a Git tag
> pointing to the head of that branch. Whenever any such "tag branch"
> advances, the user should be notified, the user responsible for the
> further commits to the SVN "tag" should be seriously hurt and the Git
> tag should be overwritten (git tag -f).

There's no need to have a Git _branch_ together with the tag -- tag is also
a ref.

For the rest, the user definitely has to be notified, because git push will
_not_ push out the updated tag if the previous version of it was already
pushed. So the user will have to deal with that manually.

If there was to be a support for tags in git-svn, I would actually suggest to
simply make the name mapping more flexible and simply say, that branches in
tags/ should be imported to refs/tags (while the rest going to
refs/remotes/svn). You see, subversion tags are not annotated (so they don't
need special handling) and git-update-ref will update tags just fine.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <[email-masked]>