Shawn Pearce wrote: > Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> If the user has been using reflog for a long time (e.g. since its >>> introduction) then it is very likely that an existing branch's >>> reflog may still mention commits which have long since been pruned >>> out of the repository. >> >> I've thought about this issue when I did the repack/prune; my >> take on this was you should prune reflog first then repack. > > OK, but we should suggest that to the user rather than just > cryptically saying 'fatal: bad object refs/heads/build'. I still think it is a good idea to allow user (experienced user) to set to not consider reflog for saving. Especially that there exist repositories which have reflogs with long pruned commits, and it would be nice to preserve the reflog info, even if some of information is not available. -- 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