From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 23:53:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 41/44] refs.c: add a new flag for transaction delete for refs we know are packed only
Message-ID: <20140522235351.GB12314@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140522234440.GA12314@google.com>

Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:

>> I hate rename_ref :-)
>>
>> I have reworked the transaction code to special case the deletion of
>> the old ref for n/n -> n  and n -> n/n renames
>> so that we can carefully avoid n/n.lock files to exist or prevent the
>> directory <-> file transition for n during these renames.
[...]
> 	Unlink the corresponding loose refs so packed-refs
> 		becomes authoritative for them.
> 	Lock packed-refs.
> 	Perform updates and removals in the packed-refs cache.
> 	Commit packed-refs.

... or is the problem that the reflogs conflict?

How does rename_ref handle propagating the reflog from the old
name to the new name, by the way?

Thanks,
Jonathan