Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> 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 - 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