Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Jonathan Nieder <> wrote:

>> ... or is the problem that the reflogs conflict?
>> How does rename_ref handle propagating the reflog from the old
>> name to the new name, by the way?
> I haven't touched that yet, but we can fix it after the next series
> when we have transaction support for reflogs.
> It still renames the reflog via the magic name
> #define TMP_RENAMED_LOG  "logs/refs/.tmp-renamed-log"

Okay, after looking at what "git branch -m" currently does (deletes
the old ref and creates the new one in separate transactions), I'm
convinced that this take-locks-for-a-shorter-period-than-is-necessary
trick is an improvement relative to the status quo.  It gets rid of
the window with objects unreferenced between the ref deletion and ref
creation, which is a nice improvement.

I still haven't looked closely at the details of the code change but
the idea looks sane as a first step.

Later we can try to get the semantics right for this kind of
delete/create pair in general transactions, if someone is interested.
:)  No need for the perfect to be the enemy of the good in the

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to