MantisBT - Doomseeker |
| View Issue Details |
|
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
| 0003971 | Doomseeker | [All Projects] Bug | public | 2022-01-18 19:21 | 2024-11-03 18:54 |
|
| Reporter | WubTheCaptain | |
| Assigned To | Zalewa | |
| Priority | normal | Severity | trivial | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | fixed | |
| Platform | | OS | | OS Version | |
| Product Version | 1.3.1 | |
| Target Version | 1.4.1 | Fixed in Version | 1.4.1 | |
|
| Summary | 0003971: No annotated Git tags are available (since the repository migration from Mercurial to Git) |
| Description | Starting with the migration from Mercurial to Git (Doomseeker 1.3.1), new releases have been kept tagged with lightweight Git tags.
Quote from git-tag(1)
Tag objects (created with -a, -s, or -u) are called "annotated" tags; they contain a creation date, the tagger name and e-mail, a tagging message, and an optional GnuPG signature. Whereas a "lightweight" tag is simply a name for an object (usually a commit object).
Annotated tags are meant for release while lightweight tags are meant for private or temporary object labels.
I believe every version released at least since Git has been the primary repository (1.3.1 and later) should have annotated tags instead. Existing lightweight tags should be converted? |
| Steps To Reproduce | |
| Additional Information | 'https://git-scm.com/docs/git-tag [^]' |
| Tags | No tags attached. |
| Relationships | | has duplicate | 0004054 | closed | Zalewa | Doomseeker's Git repository doesn't have annotated tags for releases (only lightweight tags) |
|
| Attached Files | |
|
| Issue History |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
| 2022-01-18 19:21 | WubTheCaptain | New Issue | |
| 2022-01-18 19:23 | WubTheCaptain | Note Added: 0022113 | |
| 2022-01-18 19:23 | WubTheCaptain | Note Edited: 0022113 | bug_revision_view_page.php?bugnote_id=22113#r13557 |
| 2023-02-25 21:30 | Zalewa | Relationship added | has duplicate 0004054 |
| 2023-02-25 21:30 | Zalewa | Status | new => confirmed |
| 2023-03-07 23:55 | Zalewa | Note Added: 0022792 | |
| 2023-03-07 23:55 | Zalewa | Assigned To | => Zalewa |
| 2023-03-07 23:55 | Zalewa | Status | confirmed => needs review |
| 2023-03-07 23:56 | Zalewa | Target Version | => 1.4.1 |
| 2023-03-17 18:34 | Zalewa | Status | needs review => resolved |
| 2023-03-17 18:34 | Zalewa | Fixed in Version | => 1.4.1 |
| 2023-03-17 18:34 | Zalewa | Resolution | open => fixed |
| 2024-11-03 18:54 | Zalewa | Status | resolved => closed |
|
Notes |
|
|
|
Taking GitHub as a practical third-party site example, from former experience as a GitHub user, IIRC "annotated tags" are placed into a "releases" section with downloads while everything (or lightweight tags") are placed into "tags".
I'm reporting this because I was a bit frustrated at 1.3.3 tag being rewritten because it "wasn't released yet" (0003959:0022106), and Zalewa was kind of correct, because arguably nothing has been tagged as a "release" (using annotated tags).
|
|
|
|
(0022792)
|
|
Zalewa
|
|
2023-03-07 23:55
|
|
Well, I did this.
All lightweight tags were converted to annotated. I set the dates of the tags to the dates of their respective tagged commits, and the tagger user to myself. This is probably historically inaccurate, but I don't know if we can still obtain the this information from Hg (also: it's not that important).
Since this edits the public history (oh boy) all users who have the clone with lightweight tags now need to do:
git fetch --tags --force
All new tags from now one shall be annotated. |
|