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 ?
> 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?