6 git-tag - Create, list, delete or verify a tag object signed with GPG
12 'git-tag' [-a | -s | -u <key-id>] [-f] [-m <msg> | -F <file>] <name> [<head>]
13 'git-tag' -d <name>...
14 'git-tag' [-n [<num>]] -l [<pattern>]
15 'git-tag' -v <name>...
19 Adds a 'tag' reference in `.git/refs/tags/`
21 Unless `-f` is given, the tag must not yet exist in
22 `.git/refs/tags/` directory.
24 If one of `-a`, `-s`, or `-u <key-id>` is passed, the command
25 creates a 'tag' object, and requires the tag message. Unless
26 `-m <msg>` or `-F <file>` is given, an editor is started for the user to type
29 Otherwise just the SHA1 object name of the commit object is
30 written (i.e. a lightweight tag).
32 A GnuPG signed tag object will be created when `-s` or `-u
33 <key-id>` is used. When `-u <key-id>` is not used, the
34 committer identity for the current user is used to find the
35 GnuPG key for signing.
40 Make an unsigned, annotated tag object
43 Make a GPG-signed tag, using the default e-mail address's key
46 Make a GPG-signed tag, using the given key
49 Replace an existing tag with the given name (instead of failing)
52 Delete existing tags with the given names.
55 Verify the gpg signature of the given tag names.
58 <num> specifies how many lines from the annotation, if any,
59 are printed when using -l.
60 The default is not to print any annotation lines.
61 If no number is given to `-n`, only the first line is printed.
64 List tags with names that match the given pattern (or all if no pattern is given).
65 Typing "git tag" without arguments, also lists all tags.
68 Use the given tag message (instead of prompting)
71 Take the tag message from the given file. Use '-' to
72 read the message from the standard input.
76 By default, git-tag in sign-with-default mode (-s) will use your
77 committer identity (of the form "Your Name <your@email.address>") to
78 find a key. If you want to use a different default key, you can specify
79 it in the repository configuration as follows:
81 -------------------------------------
83 signingkey = <gpg-key-id>
84 -------------------------------------
93 What should you do when you tag a wrong commit and you would
96 If you never pushed anything out, just re-tag it. Use "-f" to
97 replace the old one. And you're done.
99 But if you have pushed things out (or others could just read
100 your repository directly), then others will have already seen
101 the old tag. In that case you can do one of two things:
104 Just admit you screwed up, and use a different name. Others have
105 already seen one tag-name, and if you keep the same name, you
106 may be in the situation that two people both have "version X",
107 but they actually have 'different' "X"'s. So just call it "X.1"
111 You really want to call the new version "X" too, 'even though'
112 others have already seen the old one. So just use "git tag -f"
113 again, as if you hadn't already published the old one.
115 However, Git does *not* (and it should not)change tags behind
116 users back. So if somebody already got the old tag, doing a "git
117 pull" on your tree shouldn't just make them overwrite the old
120 If somebody got a release tag from you, you cannot just change
121 the tag for them by updating your own one. This is a big
122 security issue, in that people MUST be able to trust their
123 tag-names. If you really want to do the insane thing, you need
124 to just fess up to it, and tell people that you messed up. You
125 can do that by making a very public announcement saying:
128 Ok, I messed up, and I pushed out an earlier version tagged as X. I
129 then fixed something, and retagged the *fixed* tree as X again.
131 If you got the wrong tag, and want the new one, please delete
132 the old one and fetch the new one by doing:
135 git fetch origin tag X
137 to get my updated tag.
139 You can test which tag you have by doing
143 which should return 0123456789abcdef.. if you have the new version.
145 Sorry for inconvenience.
148 Does this seem a bit complicated? It *should* be. There is no
149 way that it would be correct to just "fix" it behind peoples
150 backs. People need to know that their tags might have been
154 On Automatic following
155 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
157 If you are following somebody else's tree, you are most likely
158 using tracking branches (`refs/heads/origin` in traditional
159 layout, or `refs/remotes/origin/master` in the separate-remote
160 layout). You usually want the tags from the other end.
162 On the other hand, if you are fetching because you would want a
163 one-shot merge from somebody else, you typically do not want to
164 get tags from there. This happens more often for people near
165 the toplevel but not limited to them. Mere mortals when pulling
166 from each other do not necessarily want to automatically get
167 private anchor point tags from the other person.
169 You would notice "please pull" messages on the mailing list says
170 repo URL and branch name alone. This is designed to be easily
171 cut&pasted to "git fetch" command line:
174 Linus, please pull from
176 git://git..../proj.git master
178 to get the following updates...
184 $ git pull git://git..../proj.git master
187 In such a case, you do not want to automatically follow other's
190 One important aspect of git is it is distributed, and being
191 distributed largely means there is no inherent "upstream" or
192 "downstream" in the system. On the face of it, the above
193 example might seem to indicate that the tag namespace is owned
194 by upper echelon of people and tags only flow downwards, but
195 that is not the case. It only shows that the usage pattern
196 determines who are interested in whose tags.
198 A one-shot pull is a sign that a commit history is now crossing
199 the boundary between one circle of people (e.g. "people who are
200 primarily interested in networking part of the kernel") who may
201 have their own set of tags (e.g. "this is the third release
202 candidate from the networking group to be proposed for general
203 consumption with 2.6.21 release") to another circle of people
204 (e.g. "people who integrate various subsystem improvements").
205 The latter are usually not interested in the detailed tags used
206 internally in the former group (that is what "internal" means).
207 That is why it is desirable not to follow tags automatically in
210 It may well be that among networking people, they may want to
211 exchange the tags internal to their group, but in that workflow
212 they are most likely tracking with each other's progress by
213 having tracking branches. Again, the heuristic to automatically
214 follow such tags is a good thing.
219 Written by Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
220 Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> and Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>.
224 Documentation by David Greaves, Junio C Hamano and the git-list <git@vger.kernel.org>.
228 Part of the gitlink:git[7] suite