Re: reftable: How to represent deleted referees of symrefs in the reflog?

> On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:46 PM Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> wrote:
> > To me it seems like deletions in this case only delete a particular log
> > entry instead of the complete log for a particular reference. And some
> > older discussion [1] seems to confirm my hunch that a complete reflog is
> > deleted not with `log_type = 0x0`, but instead by writing the null
> > object ID as new ID.
> 
> No, writing a null OID (more precisely a transition from $SHA1 =>
> $ZERO) means that a branch was at $SHA1, and then was deleted. The
> reflog continues to exist, and new entries may be added by reviving
> the branch. That would add a $ZERO => $NEWSHA transition, but the
> history of the branch prior to its deletion is retained.
> 
> >  # This behaviour is a bit more on the weird side. We delete the
> >  # referee, and that causes the files backend to claim that the reflog
> >  # for HEAD is gone, as well. The reflog still exists though, as
> >  # demonstrated in the next command.
> >  $ git update-ref -m delete-main -d refs/heads/main
> >  $ git reflog show HEAD
> > fatal: ambiguous argument 'HEAD': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.
> 
> This looks wrong to me. HEAD has a history, and that history didn't go
> away because the current branch happened to be deleted.
> 
> > It kind of feels like the second step in the files backend where the
> > reflog is claimed to not exist is buggy -- I'd have expected to still
> 
> right, I agree.
> 
> > see the reflog, as the HEAD reference exists quite alright and has never
> > stopped to exist. And in the third step, I'd have expected to see three
> > reflog entries, including the deletion that is indeed still present in
> > the on-disk logfile.
> >
> > But with the reftable backend the problem becomes worse: we cannot even
> > represent the fact that the reflog still exists, but that the deletion
> > of the referee has caused the HEAD to point to the null OID, because the
> > null OID indicates complete deletion of the reflog.
> 
> This doesn't match my recollection. See
> https://github.com/git/git/pull/1215, or more precisely
> https://github.com/git/git/blob/3b2c5ddb28fa42a8c944373bea2ca756b1723908/refs/reftable-backend.c#L1582
> 
> Removing the entire reflog means removing all the individual entries
> using tombstones.

> > Consequentially, if
> > we wrote the null OID, we'd only be able to see the last log entry here.
> >
> > It may totally be that I'm missing something obvious here. But if not,
> > it leaves us with a couple of options for how to fix it:
> >
> >     1. Disregard this edge case and accept that the reftable backend
> >        does not do exactly the same thing as the files backend in very
> >        specific situations like this.
> 
> I remember discussing with Jun that it would be acceptable to have
> slight semantic differences if unavoidable for the reflogs, and there
> should be a record of this in the list.  I think there will always be
> some differences: for example, dropping reflogs because of a dir/file
> conflict seems like a bug rather than a feature.