Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 04:21:22AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > >> > (1) Such a user does not necessarily know a casual "git repack -a" breaks >> > the dependency, defeating the -s option s/he deliberately used in >> > order to save disk space in the first place. Perhaps we can reword >> > this further to kill two penguins with a single stone? >> >> Perhaps a runtime warning that you're about to break it? This user may >> not even be the one who set the thing up, no? > > I'm not really sure what such a setup would look like.... > ... > That being said, I can see there being setups where such a warning might > be useful. However, we don't really know if the user _wants_ that > effect, or if it is an accident. > ... > "here is how you break the dependency" advice will also get the warning. > > I'm torn on whether this is actually a good idea. I would understand if you were torn if the proposed change were to refuse to run without -l in a repository with alternates when --force is not given, or something of that nature. But I can tell you that this "just warn" cannot be a good idea for a very simple reason: breaking and then warning is useless---it is too late for the user to do anything about it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html