From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 20:39:41 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Reflogs for deleted refs: fix breakage and suggest namespace change
Message-ID: <7vboi8rl2q.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1345310086-20089-1-git-send-email-mhagger@alum.mit.edu>

mhagger@alum.mit.edu writes:

> Given that a flag day would anyway be required to add a d/f-tolerant
> system, I could live with a separate "graveyard" namespace as
> originally proposed by Jeff.
>
> However, I still think that as long as we are making a jump, we could
> try to land closer to the ultimate destination.

Do we _know_ already what the "ultimate destination" looks like?  

If the answer is yes, then I agree, but otherwise, I doubt it is a
good idea to introduce unnecessary complexity to the system that may
have to be ripped out and redone.

I didn't get the impression that we know the "ultimate destination"
from the previous discussion, especially if we discount the tangent
around "having next and next/foo at the same time" which was on
nobody's wish, but I may be misremembering things.