Martin von Zweigbergk [off-list ref] writes:
Good point. You dropped the bit about the notes (texts) being kept
alive. I don't know if you did that intentionally are not.
Yes, I did it on purpose, because it is just one of the things that
can be reached from refs/, but we shouldn't write our document for
those like me, who know what notes and other things in Git are.
I initially
thought that we should keep that bit, but it's probably not actually
very useful information. Users probably don't have large amounts of
information stored in notes, so they probably don't care whether notes
text is kept, especially since there's no good way of pruning the
notes.
I am not sure if I agree with any part of the above. End-user data
is precious no matter the volume, and we keep notes by making them
reachable from refs in the refs/notes/ hierarchy.
I am not sure what qualifies, in your eyes, "good" way, but "git
notes prune" is a good way to remove notes that are attached to
objects that have already been pruned away.
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 9:30 PM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Martin von Zweigbergk [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Good point. You dropped the bit about the notes (texts) being kept
alive. I don't know if you did that intentionally are not.
Yes, I did it on purpose, because it is just one of the things that
can be reached from refs/, but we shouldn't write our document for
those like me, who know what notes and other things in Git are.
quoted
I initially
thought that we should keep that bit, but it's probably not actually
very useful information. Users probably don't have large amounts of
information stored in notes, so they probably don't care whether notes
text is kept, especially since there's no good way of pruning the
notes.
I am not sure if I agree with any part of the above. End-user data
is precious no matter the volume, and we keep notes by making them
reachable from refs in the refs/notes/ hierarchy.
Sorry, I forgot to qualify that whole paragraph with something like
"Regarding notes attached to unreachable commits: ". Users will
obviously not want to lose notes about reachable commits and they
won't. So the only remaining concern in my mind was whether they might
care about it because they *want* to save the space that the note
used. Makes more sense then?
I am not sure what qualifies, in your eyes, "good" way, but "git
notes prune" is a good way to remove notes that are attached to
objects that have already been pruned away.
My paragraph above probably clarifies (that I was thinking about
saving the space used by notes, which I don't think `git notes prune`
helps with).