From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 23:17:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] refs: update comment.
Message-ID: <xmqqo8624knk.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <82971ddbfcf233c4462fb13eff8b742d84c72db0.1638211786.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

"Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> From: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
>
> REF_IS_PRUNING is right below this comment, so it clearly does not belong in
> this comment. This was apparently introduced in commit 5ac95fee (Nov 5, 2017
> "refs: tidy up and adjust visibility of the `ref_update` flags").

Thanks for carefully reading and correcting.

>
> Signed-off-by: Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
> ---
>  refs/files-backend.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
> index 151b0056fe5..5cfdec1e820 100644
> --- a/refs/files-backend.c
> +++ b/refs/files-backend.c
> @@ -16,8 +16,7 @@
>   * This backend uses the following flags in `ref_update::flags` for
>   * internal bookkeeping purposes. Their numerical values must not
>   * conflict with REF_NO_DEREF, REF_FORCE_CREATE_REFLOG, REF_HAVE_NEW,
> - * REF_HAVE_OLD, or REF_IS_PRUNING, which are also stored in
> - * `ref_update::flags`.
> + * or REF_HAVE_OLD, which are also stored in `ref_update::flags`.
>   */
>  
>  /*