On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Jeff King p...@peff.net wrote:
I noticed that git pack-refs --all will pack a top-level ref like
refs/foo, but will not actually prune $GIT_DIR/refs/foo. I do not
see the point in having a policy not to pack refs/foo if --all is
given. But even if we did have
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:38:56AM -0700, Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
[1/5]: git-prompt: do not look for refs/stash in $GIT_DIR
[2/5]: pack-refs: prune top-level refs like refs/foo
[3/5]: fast-import: clean up pack_data pointer in end_packfile
[4/5]: fast-import: fix buffer overflow in
On 08/23/2014 07:23 AM, Jeff King wrote:
I noticed that git pack-refs --all will pack a top-level ref like
refs/foo, but will not actually prune $GIT_DIR/refs/foo. I do not
see the point in having a policy not to pack refs/foo if --all is
given. But even if we did have such a policy, this
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 09:29:36AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
[1/5]: git-prompt: do not look for refs/stash in $GIT_DIR
[2/5]: pack-refs: prune top-level refs like refs/foo
[3/5]: fast-import: clean up pack_data pointer in end_packfile
[4/5]: fast-import: fix buffer overflow
I noticed that git pack-refs --all will pack a top-level ref like
refs/foo, but will not actually prune $GIT_DIR/refs/foo. I do not
see the point in having a policy not to pack refs/foo if --all is
given. But even if we did have such a policy, this seems broken; we
should either pack and prune, or
5 matches
Mail list logo