Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Again, keeping reflogs 90 days for stuff that is _already_ reachable
> through existing refs is much less useful than keeping otherwise
> unreachable stuff 90 days. So I still don't see the point of this
> eagerness to prune deleted stuff faster.
Hmph, I honestly cannot care about this very much without knowing where
this is going, because the distinction between the two has been with us
practically forever, since the day one of "reflog expire".
Is there any constructive conclusion you are aiming for? For example, is
a proposal to update the default value of both to 90 or 120 days coming?
FWIW, I have this in my primary repository.
[gc]
packrefs = no
reflogexpire = '2005-01-01 00:00:00 +0000'
reflogexpireunreachable = '2005-01-01 00:00:00 +0000'
--
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