Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2010, #02; Sun, 04)
From: Michael J Gruber <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:33
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 05.04.2010 03:14:
Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with '-' are only in 'pu' while commits prefixed with '+' are in 'next'. The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them. --------------------------------------------------
* mg/notes-reflog (2010-03-29) 2 commits - refs.c: Write reflogs for notes just like for branch heads - t3301-notes: Test the creation of reflog entries Implementation is trivially correct; I am unsure if "notes" tree wants reflog in the first place, though. Please convince me and I'll move it to 'next' soon, aiming for -rc0 or -rc1 at the latest.
I think that Jeff's impressive textconv caching is only the first of many uses of notes where the notes ref is not a branch head with continuously added history, but where the ref is being rewritten over and over again. Also, people may rewrite their refs/notes/commits when experimenting with remote notes trees. In both cases, I deem the reflog "backup" a useful safety measure (just as for other refs), and the automatic purging of the reflog provides just the appropriate housekeeping. Michael