Jonathan Nieder <> writes:

> How to take care of the recovery use case is another question.  FWIW I
> also would prefer if "git update-ref -d" or "git branch -D" could be
> used to delete corrupt refs instead of having to use fsck (since a
> fsck run can take a while), but that's a question for a later series.

Good thinking.

> In an ideal world, the low-level functions would allow *reading* and
> *deleting* poorly named refs (even without any special flag) but not
> creating them.  Is that doable?  The main complication I can see is
> iteration: would iteration skip poorly named refs and warn, or would
> something more complicated be needed?

I somehow thought that was what we have always designed for, which
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