On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:38:56AM -0700, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
> > [1/5]: git-prompt: do not look for refs/stash in $GIT_DIR
> > [2/5]: pack-refs: prune top-level refs like "refs/foo"
> > [3/5]: fast-import: clean up pack_data pointer in end_packfile
> > [4/5]: fast-import: fix buffer ov
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> I noticed that "git pack-refs --all" will pack a top-level ref like
> "refs/foo", but will not actually prune "$GIT_DIR/refs/foo". I do not
> see the point in having a policy not to pack "refs/foo" if "--all" is
> given. But even if we did have
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 09:29:36AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> > [1/5]: git-prompt: do not look for refs/stash in $GIT_DIR
> > [2/5]: pack-refs: prune top-level refs like "refs/foo"
> > [3/5]: fast-import: clean up pack_data pointer in end_packfile
> > [4/5]: fast-import: fix buffer o
On 08/23/2014 07:23 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> I noticed that "git pack-refs --all" will pack a top-level ref like
> "refs/foo", but will not actually prune "$GIT_DIR/refs/foo". I do not
> see the point in having a policy not to pack "refs/foo" if "--all" is
> given. But even if we did have such a poli
I noticed that "git pack-refs --all" will pack a top-level ref like
"refs/foo", but will not actually prune "$GIT_DIR/refs/foo". I do not
see the point in having a policy not to pack "refs/foo" if "--all" is
given. But even if we did have such a policy, this seems broken; we
should either pack and
5 matches
Mail list logo