On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > >> Also, the more important reply was Peff's reply that suggested that the >> proposed fix was incomplete, as it misses --unpack-unreachable: >> https://public-inbox.org/git/20160601160143.ga9...@sigill.intra.peff.net/ > > While I think that --unpack-unreachable thing is a symptom of the > basic approach of patching things up at the wrong level, if you are > hinting that fix to the issue that gc does not pay attention to > various anchoring point in other worktrees is more important than > adding new commands to "worktree", I fully agree with that.
Just to make it clear. It's not like I put new worktree commands on higher priority. "worktree move/remove" was more or less ready for a long time and the gc problem was blocked by ref-iterator series (which entered master a few moths ago, but then I was busy with other things and couldn't get right back to the gc issue). You didn't answer Johannes's rhetoric question though: "It should be possible to do that redesign work while having a small workaround in place that unbreaks, say, me?" I assume "the right way" is still updating refs subsystem so that we can have a ref iterator to traverse all refs, or just one worktree, etc. Should I keep looking for a middle ground (maybe better than the linked series) to "unbreak Johannes"? I ignored all those comments (about --unpack-reachable and bisect refs) because I saw no chance of an updated series getting in git.git anyway. -- Duy
