Re: odd name-rev behavior?

Tim Walberg [off-list ref] writes:

Never noticed this before - is this expected? It doesn't seem to
match documentation, in any case...

Basically, 'git name-rev --all' lists a lot of lines that are
marked as "undefined", and most, if not all, of the objects
represented are trees, not commits... I wouldn't have expected
name-rev to follow the link from a commit to a tree and try to
process that result...

I wouldn't either, but this does not look like a recent breakage. v1.6.0
seems to show the same broken behaviour.