From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:37:46 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] reflog: ignore expire-unreachable for "HEAD" reflog
Message-ID: <7vljcogot1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004152059100.7232@xanadu.home>

Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> writes:

> Again, keeping reflogs 90 days for stuff that is _already_ reachable 
> through existing refs is much less useful than keeping otherwise 
> unreachable stuff 90 days.  So I still don't see the point of this 
> eagerness to prune deleted stuff faster.

Hmph, I honestly cannot care about this very much without knowing where
this is going, because the distinction between the two has been with us
practically forever, since the day one of "reflog expire".

Is there any constructive conclusion you are aiming for?  For example, is
a proposal to update the default value of both to 90 or 120 days coming?

FWIW, I have this in my primary repository.

    [gc]
            packrefs = no
            reflogexpire = '2005-01-01 00:00:00 +0000'
            reflogexpireunreachable = '2005-01-01 00:00:00 +0000'