From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 19:48:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] reflog: ignore expire-unreachable for "HEAD" reflog
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1004151545240.7232@xanadu.home>
In-Reply-To: <7vhbnck618.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > I think another way of addressing the same problem would be to redefine
> > "reachable" in this context as "reachable from any current ref".
> 
> I tend to agree, but I haven't thought through the case for entries that
> point at commits on detached HEAD.  My gut feeling is that unless they are
> connected to a real ref by now after all these expireunreachable days,
> they are "failed experiments" and deserve to get pruned, so "from any ref"
> would probably work well for them.

I'm a bit worried about this discussion.

What's the point of having a reflog for unreachable stuff if it is to be 
pruned faster than stuff that is already reachable without any reflog?


Nicolas