Re: git-gc doesn't clean up leftover objects after git-filter-branch unless you clone first
- From
Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 24, 2008, 16:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <32541b130804240959y3b05d4b5u67ac7a7c14bf187e@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20080424161407.GA23737@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 4/24/08, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> Hmm, maybe it would make sense to put that note in git-prune, with a > note in git-gc to look at the prune page.
Perhaps.
> But if the note were moved to git-prune, it would be natural to mention > git-reflog there. What do you think?
I gather there's a movement in recent git versions (sorry, I only tuned in recently) to encourage people to use git-gc instead of git-prune in almost all cases. The reasons I ever looked at git-prune at all was that git-gc mentioned it in "See Also", and because "git-prune" sounded more obviously like what I wanted than "git-gc" when I looked at "man git".
Adding git-gc *and* git-reflog as See Also entries in git-prune would make sense to me.
Avery