Re: "lock file exists" when fetching in bare clone of repository

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

But with batched transactions that's not possible anymore, as we would
indeed try to lock the same ref twice. Assuming that this really is the
case, I wonder whether we should detect this case, tell the user that
it's impossible to store all refs on their system, and then continue
regardless while ejecting that specific ref from the transaction.

Maybe it is too optimistic to think that they will just start using
reftable in Git 3.0, and we can avoid extra code to detect this?

Or we can just tell them to use reftable way before Git 3.0; it is
not like we feel that the reftable is way too unstable that we won't
tag Git 3.0 until it gets ready---it is ready now.