Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> A safe and sane approach may be to teach these an option to tell >> them to omit non-commits or to emit all kinds, and make remote-bzr >> use that to exclude non-commits. > > This has nothing to do with remote-bzr, or any remote helper. These > objects are not useful, not even to 'git fast-export'. > >> If the defaults is matched to the >> current behaviour, nobody will get hurt > > Changing nothing always ensures that nobody will get hurt, but that > doesn't improve anything either. I do not quite follow. Allowing existing code to depend on old behaviour, while letting new code that knows it does not need anything but commits, will get the best of both worlds. The new code will definitely improve (otherwise you won't be writing these patches), and the old code will not get hurt. Where is this "doesn't improve anything" coming from? -- 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