Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> May I humbly suggest that we actually start calling it "stamp"
> instead, to make it very clear that this is a different operation from
> the "git tag" operation that's done on the tree a bit later?
In the CVS workflow there was no reason to draw a distinction, since we
applied the tag at the same time as committing the textual changes.
But I see the point of avoiding the word "tag" now. I'll change my
private procedural notes to recommend "stamp", but don't guarantee that
I'll remember the first few times ...
regards, tom lane