Re: git remote update -> rejected
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Apr 22, 2008, 13:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0804221357420.4460@eeepc-johanness>
- In-Reply-To
- <20080422125618.GA27577@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Hi,
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jeff King wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> Dscho wrote: > > > It was a concious decision, but maybe it was wrong. > > > > My rationale was this: if I mirror another person's repository, I want > > all the history. And I do want to keep it, even if the other person > > decides to clean the original repository out. > > > > (In this case, the reflogs would not help, since I do not have a HEAD > > reflog for all the deleted branches, and deleting the refs deletes > > their reflogs, too.) > > Hmm, there is an inconsistency here, though, since we set it up one way > on clone and another way on "remote add". Though if clone does finally > become "init + remote add + checkout" that will resolve itself. > > Still, I think I prefer the old "+" behavior. We don't actually > _delete_ branches, we just allow non-fast-forward updates. The reflogs > will still be there.
Oh, that's right: only "git remote prune" will delete stale refs only.
But my other point about possibly interfering with local branches still holds true.
Ciao, Dscho