From: Jakub Narebski Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 20:15:06 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Enhance core.logallrefupdates Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vr6xiio02.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jakub Narebski writes: > >>>    Come to think of it, it might make sense to change the >>>    meaning of "true" to do what this patch does.  I do not think >>>    of reasons to create missing reflog for tags automatically >>>    anyway. >> >> If we change meaning of "true", perhaps (just in case in case) we >> should add "all" value? > > Didn't I just say that I do not think of reasons to do so ;-)? > > Saying "just in case" is not enough. You need to say at least > "this hypothetical workflow which requires to update refs/xxx > and doing automated reflog creation only under refs/heads makes > that workflow less convenient". If I remember correctly there was example of workflow which did fetch remote heads to local tags. But I'm not sure if this reflog made sense with that workflow. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git