2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:52:33
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
But we shouldn't be packing totally unreferenced objects.
Everything you said is correct in today's Git and I obviously know it, but I was taking the "Or have an extra option to..." at the end of the OP's message in the thread into account, so...
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:52:33
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 10:08:15AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:quoted
But we shouldn't be packing totally unreferenced objects.Everything you said is correct in today's Git and I obviously know it, but I was taking the "Or have an extra option to..." at the end of the OP's message in the thread into account, so...
Ah, sorry, I missed the subtlety of Linus's "repacking the objects results in problems..." from his later message and thought he just meant repacking in general. Yes, it's a bad idea to repack unreachable objects because then you could never prune anything. I think just shrinking the --expire window that we already use is a much more reasonable bet. It's not about preventing the loss of old work (reflogs are there for that), but about avoiding hurting an actively running, about-to-reference-the-objects git process. And 2 weeks is quite conservative for that. -Peff