Re: git gc & deleted branches

Geert Bosch wrote:

On May 9, 2008, at 00:19, Jeff King wrote:

quoted

I like it. It makes an easy rule to say "packed objects _never_ get
pruned, they only get demoted to loose objects." And then of course
we have sane rules for pruning loose objects.

Isn't there an issue with the "git gc" triggering because there
may be too many loose unreferenced objects?
Still, I do like the approach.

This would be an argument for going the extra mile and having the loose
objects adopt the timestamp of their pack file. In the normal case they
would probably be pruned immediately during the same git-gc run.

Maybe unreferenced objects and old refs should go to a .git/lost+found
directory and be expired from there. This has a couple of benefits:

  -  Objects will not be accessible by ordinary git commands for a while,
     before they are really removed, avoiding surprises

Unreferenced objects are sometimes used by other repositories which have
this repository listed as an alternate. So it may not be a good idea to
make the unreferenced objects inaccessible.

-brandon