On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 2:50 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Not particularly interested in the cause, but not so strongly > against it to veto it. I wonder how many people keep old branches like I do, which are usually far from remotes. > Doesn't it make more sense to use a notes-cache that is keyed off of > the commit object name X of the remote? You will have a single note > that stores a blob for the commit object remotes/origin/master, and > the blob tells you how far the commit at the tip of 'frotz' is from > it, and the same for 'xyzzy'. > > You would obviouly need to run "gc" on such a notes-cache tree from > time to time, removing notes for commits that are not tip of any > branch that could be a fork point, and from the remaining notes > blobs, entries that describe commits that are not tip of any branch, > if you go that route. The notes-cache route looks much nicer. Thanks. We can also use Jeff's persistent hash table from his rename-cache series. -- Duy -- 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